AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core i5-14400T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 across all eleven shared PassMark workloads, with the Intel Core i5-14400T failing to claim a single win. The most extreme margin appears in the prime number search test, where the AMD part scores 320 against Intel's 73, a 338.4% advantage. That result, while impressive, reflects a specific workload pattern rather than a general rule, since the Ryzen's Zen 5 architecture handles integer-heavy iterative loops with far greater efficiency than Raptor Lake's hybrid core layout.

In data compression, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 delivers 554,760 points versus 235,636 for the i5-14400T, a 135.4% lead. This workload benefits from the AMD chip's larger shared L3 cache and higher sustained memory bandwidth, both of which reduce the penalty of moving data between cores. The encryption test shows a similar story: 27,784 versus 13,244, a 109.8% gap, indicating stronger AES and cryptographic throughput on the Zen 5 part.

The extended instructions benchmark produces the second-largest differential on the board. AMD scores 45,666, Intel scores 14,562, a 213.6% difference. That workload exercises AVX-512 and similar vector extensions, areas where the Ryzen's 12-core design with full-width execution units has a structural advantage over the i5's 10-core setup. Floating point math also leans heavily toward AMD: 99,548 versus 49,139, a 102.6% margin. Integer math follows suit at 152,414 versus 65,667, a 132.1% lead.

The multi-threaded PassMark score, which aggregates many of these individual tests, shows AMD at 45,231 and Intel at 20,223, a 123.7% advantage. That number places the Ryzen in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the i5-14400T sits at the 79th percentile. The physics simulation subtest mirrors the multi-thread result: 2,887 versus 1,244, also a 132.1% gap, suggesting that the AMD part scales better across its 24 threads than Intel does across its 16.

Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive task, shows AMD at 59,487 versus Intel's 25,181, a 136.2% lead. This outcome aligns with the Ryzen's quad-channel LPDDR5X memory interface delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the Intel part relies on a dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 setup with no recorded bandwidth figure. Even the single-thread tests, where Intel's higher boost clock might be expected to help, favor AMD: 3,927 versus 3,512, an 11.8% margin. That result is notable because the i5-14400T boosts to 4.50 GHz while the Ryzen tops out at 5.00 GHz, but the Zen 5 core's per-clock efficiency overcomes the raw frequency difference.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses a Zen 5 architecture built on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². It packs 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core i5-14400T is a Raptor Lake Refresh part on Intel's 10 nm process, with a single 215 mm² die. It offers 10 cores and 16 threads, clocking from 1.50 GHz base to 4.50 GHz boost. The Intel part belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, while AMD's chip is part of the Ryzen AI Max generation under the Strix Halo codename.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Both parts allocate 80 KB of L1 per core, but the AMD chip uses 1 MB of L2 per core, whereas Intel uses 1.25 MB per core. The shared L3 cache is the bigger differentiator: AMD provides 64 MB shared across all cores, Intel provides only 20 MB. That 44 MB difference directly impacts workloads that repeatedly access large data sets, as seen in the compression and sorting benchmarks.

Memory support further separates the two. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The i5-14400T supports both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, but the database lists no bandwidth figure for it. Both parts support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also diverges: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The AMD platform uses Socket FP11, the Intel platform uses Socket 1700. Integrated graphics differ as well, with AMD shipping a Radeon 8060S and Intel shipping UHD Graphics 730.

Thermal design power reflects the intended usage. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a 55 W TDP, while the i5-14400T is rated at 35 W. That 20 W gap is modest given the performance delta, but it also points to different market segments: the AMD part is listed as mobile, the Intel part as desktop. The production status for both is active, with release dates of January 5, 2026 for AMD and January 7, 2024 for Intel. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not part of the feature set for either.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every category in the head-to-head comparison. The largest margins appear in extended instructions (213.6%), prime number search (338.4%), and data compression (135.4%). These are compute-bound workloads where the combination of more cores, more threads, and a larger L3 cache pays off. The multi-thread PassMark score of 45,231 versus 20,223 confirms that the AMD part excels in heavily parallel tasks such as rendering, simulation, and batch processing.

The Intel Core i5-14400T, despite losing all direct comparisons, still holds its own in specific contexts. Its 35 W TDP makes it a lower-power option for desktop builds where thermal limits are tight. The dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support gives system builders flexibility in choosing cheaper or more readily available memory modules. The Gen 5 PCIe interface provides higher potential bandwidth for expansion cards, though no benchmark in the database directly measures that advantage. The i5's single-thread score of 3,512 is within 11.8% of the AMD part, so lightly threaded tasks like web browsing, office applications, and legacy software do not suffer a dramatic penalty.

The average benchmark score tells the broader story. AMD's average across all recorded tests is 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Intel's average is 27,166, placing it in the 79th percentile. The nearest rivals for the AMD part include the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 91,199 (0.7% higher), the Intel Xeon w7-2575X at 88,172 (2.7% lower), and the Intel Xeon 6736P at 87,864 (3.0% lower). For the Intel part, the closest competitors are the Intel Core i9-9900K at 27,097 (0.3% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G at 27,051 (0.4% higher), the Intel Core i7-13700H at 27,355 (0.7% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G at 27,382 (0.8% lower). These comparisons show that the i5-14400T competes with older flagship desktop parts, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits among high-end server and workstation chips.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-threaded PassMark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,231, while the Intel Core i5-14400T scores 20,223, giving AMD a 123.7% lead.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The AMD part scores 3,927 in PassMark single-thread tests, versus 3,512 for the Intel part, a margin of 11.8% in favor of AMD.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-14400T has 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD chip supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a TDP of 55 W. The Intel Core i5-14400T has a TDP of 35 W.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 boosts to 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core i5-14400T boosts to 4.50 GHz.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms the Intel Core i5-14400T in every recorded workload, with margins ranging from 11.8% in single-thread tests to 338.4% in prime number search. The AMD part's 96th percentile ranking versus Intel's 79th percentile puts them in entirely different performance classes. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 also brings a much larger L3 cache (64 MB versus 20 MB), higher memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s on a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus), and a more advanced 4 nm process node compared to Intel's 10 nm node.

The Intel Core i5-14400T does offer a lower 35 W TDP, which suits compact desktop builds with limited cooling. Its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory provides upgrade flexibility, and the Gen 5 PCIe interface is a forward-looking feature. However, the performance gap is too large to ignore. The i5's nearest rivals are older parts like the Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 5700G, indicating it competes in a mid-range desktop tier, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits alongside Xeon-class workstation chips.

For users who need maximum compute throughput across multi-threaded, vectorized, or memory-intensive workloads, the data points squarely at the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392. For users who prioritize low power consumption above all else and can accept a substantial performance deficit, the Intel Core i5-14400T remains a viable desktop option. The recorded benchmarks show no scenario where the Intel part takes the lead, so the choice hinges on whether the 20 W TDP savings outweigh a roughly 2.3x average performance disadvantage.