AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark standing?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX sits at the 93rd percentile. The AMD part also has a higher average benchmark score of 90541, versus 62738 for the Intel part, though this average is pulled up by different workload mixes.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Intel has more physical cores, but AMD has more threads thanks to simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has a lower base clock of 2.40 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Q: Which chip has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has 30 MB of shared L3 cache, which is less than half the AMD amount.

Q: How do their memory systems differ?

A: The AMD part uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth and supports ECC. The Intel part uses DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth and does not support ECC.

Q: Which chip supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: Only the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX supports PCIe Gen 5, with 20 lanes. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results split into three clear wins for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and eight wins for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX. The AMD part wins in passmark_data_compression, passmark_extended_instructions, and passmark_integer_math. The Intel part wins in passmark_data_encryption, passmark_find_prime_numbers, passmark_floating_point_math, passmark_multithread, passmark_physics, passmark_random_string_sorting, and the single-thread tests.

For integer-heavy and data-compression workloads, the AMD chip is the stronger choice. Its 19.9% lead in integer math and 7.7% lead in data compression indicate a design that favors general arithmetic and throughput-oriented tasks. The extended instructions result also favors AMD by 10.7%, suggesting better execution of specialized instruction sets.

The Intel part dominates floating-point work, with a 38% advantage in floating-point math. It also wins in encryption by 29.7%, prime number finding by 20%, and single-thread performance by 13.9%. The Intel chip is the better pick for workloads that stress floating-point arithmetic, cryptographic operations, and single-thread responsiveness, which includes many scientific and security-related applications.

The multithread result slightly favors Intel, with a 6.2% lead, despite AMD having more threads. The physics test also goes to Intel by a narrow 1.3% margin. Random string sorting favors Intel by 5%.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Arrow Lake architecture under the Arrow Lake-HX codename, built on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. Both are mobile-segment parts with active production status.

The core designs diverge significantly. AMD employs 12 cores with 24 threads, using a per-core L1 cache of 80 KB and per-core L2 cache of 1 MB, plus 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel employs 20 cores with 20 threads, with a larger per-core L1 cache of 192 KB and per-core L2 cache of 3 MB, but a much smaller shared L3 cache of 30 MB. Intel also reports a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the AMD part has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm² with no transistor count listed.

The AMD chip integrates Radeon 8060S graphics and supports ECC memory, while the Intel chip integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU and does not support ECC. The AMD part uses a quad-channel memory bus for LPDDR5X, while Intel uses a dual-channel bus for DDR5. AMD is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, whereas Intel offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The sockets differ: AMD uses Socket FP11, Intel uses BGA 2114. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD part does not. Both parts carry a 55 W TDP.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads; Intel has 20 cores and 20 threads. AMD base clock is 3.20 GHz versus 2.40 GHz for Intel. AMD boost clock is 5.00 GHz versus 5.20 GHz for Intel. Both share a 55 W TDP, but their sockets, architectures, codenames, and generations all differ.

Cache hierarchies are different at every level: AMD uses 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3; Intel uses 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. ECC support is present on AMD but absent on Intel.

PCIe capability differs: AMD has Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel has Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The integrated graphics are different: Radeon 8060S on AMD versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU on Intel. The process node differs (4 nm for AMD, 3 nm for Intel), as do the die sizes (2x 70.6 mm² for AMD, 243 mm² for Intel) and transistor count (17,800 million for Intel, not listed for AMD). The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier; the AMD part is locked.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest AMD win comes in passmark_integer_math, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152414 against 127126 for the Intel part, a 19.9% advantage. This is a substantial margin in a core CPU workload. AMD also takes passmark_extended_instructions with 45666 versus 41247, a 10.7% lead, and passmark_data_compression with 554760 versus 515143, a 7.7% lead.

The largest Intel win is in passmark_floating_point_math, where the Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 160624 against 99548 for AMD, a 38% advantage. This is the single biggest delta in the entire comparison. Intel also wins passmark_data_encryption by 29.7%, scoring 39499 versus 27784. In passmark_find_prime_numbers, Intel leads 400 to 320, a 20% margin. Single-thread performance goes to Intel by 13.9%, with scores of 4562 versus 3927.

The multithread test shows Intel ahead with 48234 versus 45231, a 6.2% lead. This is notable because AMD has 24 threads against Intel's 20. The physics test is close: Intel scores 2926 versus 2887, a 1.3% lead. Random string sorting also goes to Intel, 62591 versus 59487, a 5% margin.

Looking at the Intel chip's own Cinebench results, it scores 32612 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 2163 in Cinebench R23 singlecore. These figures provide additional context for its multithread and single-thread capabilities, though no direct AMD Cinebench scores are available in the database for this comparison.

The Verdict

The data points to two different usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the better choice for integer-heavy computation, data compression, and extended instruction workloads. Its 19.9% lead in integer math and 7.7% lead in data compression, combined with a 96th percentile standing, make it suited for general productivity and throughput-oriented tasks that rely on integer arithmetic.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX is the better choice for floating-point workloads, encryption, and single-thread responsiveness. Its 38% lead in floating-point math and 29.7% lead in encryption are decisive. The 13.9% single-thread advantage and the higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz support its case for latency-sensitive applications. The Intel part also wins the multithread test despite having fewer threads, which speaks to its efficiency in that specific workload.

The AMD chip offers higher memory bandwidth at 256.0 GB/s, ECC support, and a larger L3 cache. The Intel chip offers PCIe Gen 5, an unlocked multiplier, and a smaller process node at 3 nm. Neither chip is universally faster; the choice depends on whether the workload leans toward AMD's integer and compression strengths or Intel's floating-point, encryption, and single-thread strengths.