AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive matchup. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins 9 of the 11 shared tests, while the Intel Core 7 350 takes only 2. The magnitude of the AMD victories is substantial, often exceeding 100% and sometimes approaching 300% or more.

The largest gap appears in PassMark integer math. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152,414 against 33,734 for the Intel Core 7 350, a delta of 351.8%. This indicates a massive advantage in raw integer processing throughput, likely reflecting the difference in core count, threading, and cache architecture.

Data compression shows a similarly lopsided result. AMD's score of 554,760 dwarfs Intel's 143,123, yielding a 287.6% advantage. Extended instructions follow the same pattern: 45,666 for AMD versus 12,045 for Intel, a 279.1% delta. Random string sorting also favors AMD heavily, with a score of 59,487 against 17,238, a 245.1% difference.

The multithreaded PassMark score is another major win. AMD posts 45,231, while Intel manages 15,170, a 198.2% delta. This aligns with the core and thread configuration: the AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads. The absence of simultaneous multithreading on the Intel chip puts it at a clear disadvantage in heavily parallel workloads.

Prime number finding shows AMD ahead by 199.1%, with 320 points versus 107. Floating point math favors AMD by 132.5%, with scores of 99,548 and 42,809. Physics calculations also go AMD's way, 2,887 versus 1,173, a 146.1% delta. Data encryption sees AMD at 27,784 against Intel's 10,933, a 154.1% advantage.

The Intel Core 7 350 wins the single-threaded tests, but by a narrow margin. Its PassMark single-thread score is 4,100, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927, a delta of 4.2% in Intel's favor. This is the only benchmark category where Intel shows superiority, and the margin is modest compared to the scale of AMD's wins in multithreaded and throughput-oriented tests.

Looking at overall average benchmark scores, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 records an average of 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 7 350 averages 17,779, which puts it in the 71st percentile. The gulf in average score is roughly fivefold.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon 654, which averages 90,717. It is 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX, which averages 91,199, and it leads the Intel Xeon w7-2575X by 2.7% and the Intel Xeon 6736P by 3%. These are all server-class or high-end mobile parts, which underscores the AMD chip's standing. The Intel Core 7 350, by contrast, sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core 5 221TE, 0.5% of the AMD EPYC 9374F, 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, and 0.7% of the Intel Core 5 120U. Its competitive set is far lower in the performance hierarchy.

The data compression test is worth highlighting again. AMD's 554,760 score is nearly four times Intel's 143,123. This single result demonstrates the throughput advantage that comes with higher core counts, larger caches, and a wider memory interface. The AMD chip has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel chip has 6 MB of shared L3. That 10x difference in last-level cache is a major factor in compression and sorting workloads.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different products for two very different use cases. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear choice for compute-heavy, multithreaded, and memory-intensive workloads. Its 9-to-2 win record in head-to-head tests, combined with a 96th percentile standing, places it firmly in high-performance territory. The Intel Core 7 350, with its 71st percentile ranking and low power envelope, is a different kind of part entirely.

The AMD chip uses a 55 W TDP, while the Intel chip uses 15 W. That power difference is central to understanding the performance gap. The AMD part spends more energy to deliver far higher throughput, and the benchmark scores reflect that. The Intel part is optimized for efficiency and lighter workloads, which is why its single-thread score is actually higher.

For users who need maximum multithreaded performance, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the only rational choice from this data. Its nearest rivals are Xeon and Ryzen 9-class parts, and it trades blows with them within a few percentage points. For users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness and low power draw, the Intel Core 7 350 has a narrow but real advantage, 4.2% in PassMark single-thread, and its 15 W TDP suggests a much lighter thermal footprint.

The Intel chip's launch MSRP is $469. The AMD chip has no listed launch MSRP in the database. Both parts are mobile segments, both are active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of benchmark tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins 9 of the 11 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 7 350 wins 2.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152,414 against 33,734 for the Intel Core 7 350, a delta of 351.8%.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 350 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4,100, compared to 3,927 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392, a delta of 4.2%.

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90,541, while the Intel Core 7 350 has an average of 17,779.

Q: What are their percentile rankings?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, and the Intel Core 7 350 is in the 71st percentile.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X interface, while the Intel Core 7 350 supports 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X interface.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel part lacks hyper-threading, so its thread count equals its core count.

Base and boost clocks differ. The AMD chip runs at 3.20 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The Intel chip runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The AMD part has a higher clock in both cases, though the single-thread benchmark result favors Intel.

TDP is a major differentiator. AMD lists 55 W, Intel lists 15 W. The AMD chip uses 40 W more, which explains much of its performance advantage.

Sockets differ: AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. Process nodes also differ: AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process, Intel uses Intel's 3 nm process. The foundries are TSMC and Intel, respectively.

Memory support diverges sharply. AMD supports LPDDR5X only, in quad-channel configuration, with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, in single-channel configuration, with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

PCIe lanes differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 8060S, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe).

Cache configurations are notably different. AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. While Intel has more L1 and L2 per core, AMD's shared L3 is more than 10 times larger.

Release dates differ. AMD's release date is 2026-01-05, Intel's is 2026-04-15. Production status is Active for both. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $469; the AMD part has none listed.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses Zen 5 architecture under the codename Strix Halo, belonging to the Ryzen AI Max generation. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename under the Core 5 generation; no specific architecture name is listed for the Intel chip.

The process nodes reflect different manufacturing approaches. AMD relies on TSMC's 4 nm process, while Intel uses its own 3 nm process. Intel's node is smaller on paper, but the benchmark results do not translate that into a performance win in most tests.

Die size is listed for AMD as 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel's die size is not recorded in the database. This suggests a multi-die design for AMD and possibly a monolithic design for Intel, though the database does not explicitly confirm this.

Core and cache structure differences are significant. AMD uses 12 cores with 24 threads, with 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, plus a large 64 MB shared L3. Intel uses 6 cores with 6 threads, with 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core, plus a much smaller 6 MB shared L3. The Intel design gives each core more private cache, but the shared L3 pool is much smaller.

The memory architecture reinforces the performance divide. AMD's quad-channel LPDDR5X interface delivers 256.0 GB/s, while Intel's single-channel interface delivers only 59.7 GB/s. This 4.3x difference in memory bandwidth is a major factor in the large deltas seen in compression, sorting, and encryption workloads.

ECC support is another architectural distinction. AMD supports ECC memory, Intel does not. This makes the AMD part more suitable for error-sensitive workloads, though both are mobile parts.

Integrated graphics differ in branding and configuration. AMD uses Radeon 8060S, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The database does not provide graphics benchmark scores, so any comparison of iGPU performance is not possible from this data.

The PCIe configuration also differs: AMD provides 16 Gen 4 lanes, Intel provides 6 Gen 4 lanes. This affects expandability and external device bandwidth. The AMD part has more than double the PCIe lanes of the Intel part.

The power envelope is the most telling architectural difference. A 55 W TDP for AMD versus 15 W for Intel frames the entire performance story. The AMD chip is built to sustain high throughput across many cores and a wide memory bus. The Intel chip is built for efficiency, lighter loads, and longer battery life. The benchmark data aligns with that framing: AMD dominates in every multithreaded and bandwidth-sensitive test, while Intel's sole win is a narrow single-thread margin.