AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core i7-14700HX Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and Intel Core i7-14700HX represent two distinct approaches to high-performance mobile computing. The recorded data shows the AMD part winning 9 of 11 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel part takes the remaining 2. A closer look at the benchmark results reveals why each processor excels in specific scenarios, and where the architectural choices drive those outcomes.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 dominates compute-heavy workloads that stress parallel execution and vector processing. Its largest margin comes in the `passmark_find_prime_numbers` test, where it scores 320 against the Intel's 165, a 93.9% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to integer throughput and memory latency, and the AMD part's combination of Zen 5 cores and high-bandwidth memory delivers a decisive edge. Similarly, the `passmark_extended_instructions` test shows a 77.6% lead for AMD (45666 vs 25718), indicating superior SIMD and cryptographic instruction execution.

The AMD processor also wins in `passmark_data_compression` by 26.5% (554760 vs 438539), a workload that benefits from large caches and fast memory subsystems. The `passmark_multithread` score of 45231 versus 36566 (23.7% higher) confirms that the 12-core, 24-thread AMD design scales better in heavily threaded scenarios despite having fewer cores than the Intel part. The `passmark_physics` test shows a 28.2% advantage (2887 vs 2252), suggesting stronger floating-point and physics simulation performance.

The Intel Core i7-14700HX takes the single-thread crown, but by a razor-thin margin. Its `passmark_single_thread` score of 3947 versus 3927 for AMD represents only a 0.5% difference. This indicates that the Intel part's higher boost clock (5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz) provides a slight edge in lightly threaded tasks, but the gap is negligible in practical terms. The Intel part also wins the duplicate `passmark_singlethread` test by the same margin, confirming consistency in the measurement.

The use-case split is clear: AMD wins all multithreaded, encryption, compression, and math-heavy workloads, while Intel wins only the two single-thread tests by a hair. For workloads like video rendering, scientific computing, or database operations that use many threads, the AMD part is the stronger choice. For legacy single-threaded applications, the Intel part holds a marginal lead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Core i7-14700HX uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process. The AMD part is built on the Strix Halo codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Max generation, whereas the Intel part is from the Raptor Lake-HX Refresh generation.

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 20 cores and 28 threads. Despite this 8-core disadvantage, the AMD part wins most multithreaded benchmarks, indicating that its Zen 5 cores deliver higher per-core performance and better scaling. The L2 cache also differs: AMD provides 1 MB per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core. However, the L3 cache tells a different story: AMD has 64 MB shared, while Intel has 33 MB shared. The AMD's larger L3 cache likely contributes to its wins in data compression and random string sorting.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. The quad-channel setup and higher bandwidth give AMD a substantial advantage in memory-intensive workloads, which explains its dominance in `passmark_data_compression` and `passmark_random_string_sorting`.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD pairs the CPU with the Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. The Radeon 8060S is a more capable integrated solution, though no specific benchmark scores for graphics are recorded in the dataset. The PCIe support also differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe standard on the Intel side offers higher potential bandwidth for external devices, but this does not appear in the CPU benchmark results.

Die size and process node further separate the two. AMD's die is listed as 2x 70.6 mm² on a 4 nm node, while Intel's is 257 mm² on a 10 nm node. The smaller and denser AMD process allows for more efficient transistor packing, which may explain the performance-per-watt characteristics, though the TDP for both is recorded as 55 watts.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear overall winner for compute-intensive tasks. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms the Intel Core i7-14700HX in 9 of 11 benchmark comparisons, with margins ranging from 6.1% to 93.9%. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 90541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel part has an average score of 45953, placing it in the 89th percentile. This gap of roughly 2x in average score reflects the AMD part's superior aggregate performance.

The nearest rivals for the AMD part include the Intel Xeon 654 (avg score 90717, delta -0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (avg score 91199, delta -0.7%). This indicates that the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits near the top of the mobile CPU hierarchy, competing with workstation-class Xeon parts. The Intel Core i7-14700HX, by contrast, sits near the AMD EPYC 7303 (avg score 45960, delta 0%) and AMD EPYC 4364P (avg score 45970, delta 0%), placing it in a lower performance tier.

For users selecting a processor for heavy parallel workloads, the AMD part is the stronger choice based on the recorded data. Its wins in encryption, compression, and multithreaded tests show consistent advantages. For users who prioritize single-thread performance, the Intel part holds a 0.5% edge, but this margin is so small that it may not be perceptible in real-world applications.

The Intel part does offer more cores (20 versus 12) and a higher boost clock (5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz), but these specifications do not translate into benchmark wins. The AMD part's architectural efficiency and memory bandwidth outweigh the Intel part's raw core count. The verdict from the data: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the superior processor for most workloads, with the Intel Core i7-14700HX only marginally better in single-threaded tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multithreaded benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45231 in `passmark_multithread`, which is 23.7% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700HX's 36566.

Q: How much faster is the AMD part in data compression?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 554760 in `passmark_data_compression`, while the Intel Core i7-14700HX scores 438539, giving AMD a 26.5% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel part win any benchmark against the AMD part?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i7-14700HX wins `passmark_single_thread` and `passmark_singlethread` with a score of 3947 versus 3927, a margin of 0.5%.

Q: What is the core and thread count for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core i7-14700HX has 20 cores and 28 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i7-14700HX has 33 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90541, which is roughly double the Intel Core i7-14700HX's average of 45953.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 comes in `passmark_find_prime_numbers`, where it scores 320 versus the Intel's 165, a 93.9% delta. This test is a classic integer workload that stresses the CPU's ability to handle sequential operations and memory access patterns. The AMD part's 64 MB L3 cache and quad-channel memory bandwidth likely contribute to this massive margin.

The second-largest win is `passmark_extended_instructions`, with AMD scoring 45666 against Intel's 25718, a 77.6% delta. This benchmark measures the execution of advanced instruction sets, including AVX and other SIMD extensions. The Zen 5 architecture's implementation of these instructions appears significantly more efficient than Raptor Lake's.

In `passmark_physics`, AMD leads 2887 to 2252, a 28.2% delta. This test simulates rigid body dynamics and collision detection, which rely on floating-point math. The AMD part also wins `passmark_floating_point_math` by 6.1% (99548 vs 93836) and `passmark_integer_math` by 16.1% (152414 vs 131296). These results show consistent advantages across both integer and floating-point domains.

`passmark_data_compression` shows AMD leading 554760 to 438539, a 26.5% delta. The `passmark_random_string_sorting` test has AMD at 59487 versus Intel's 48544, a 22.5% delta. Both tests benefit from high memory bandwidth and large caches, where the AMD part's 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and 64 MB L3 cache provide clear advantages.

`passmark_multithread` shows AMD at 45231 versus Intel's 36566, a 23.7% delta. This aggregate test confirms that the AMD part's 12 cores outperform the Intel part's 20 cores in heavily threaded workloads. `passmark_data_encryption` shows a narrower margin: AMD scores 27784 versus Intel's 26092, a 6.5% delta. This test is less memory-dependent, yet AMD still wins.

The only Intel wins are `passmark_single_thread` and `passmark_singlethread`, both with scores of 3947 versus 3927, a 0.5% delta. This advantage stems from the Intel part's higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz. However, the margin is within measurement noise and unlikely to produce noticeable real-world differences.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i7-14700HX uses 20 cores and 28 threads. Base clocks differ: AMD at 3.20 GHz, Intel at 2.10 GHz. Boost clocks also differ: AMD at 5.00 GHz, Intel at 5.50 GHz.

The process node separates them significantly: AMD uses 4 nm TSMC fabrication, while Intel uses 10 nm. The die size is 2x 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 257 mm² for Intel. Socket types differ: AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, Intel uses Intel BGA 1964.

Cache configuration varies per core: L1 is 80 KB per core for both, but L2 is 1 MB per core for AMD and 2 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache is 64 MB shared for AMD and 33 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support differs: AMD uses LPDDR5X in a quad-channel configuration with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with no bandwidth figure recorded. ECC memory is supported by both.

PCIe support differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: AMD has Radeon 8060S, Intel has UHD Graphics 770.

The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD part does not. Release dates differ: AMD launched on 2026-01-05, Intel on 2024-01-07. The AMD part has a part number of 100-000001979, while Intel has SRMXG. Both are classified as mobile market segments and have a TDP of 55 watts.