AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits this comparison into two distinct profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 takes seven of the eleven recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H wins four. The AMD part dominates in throughput-heavy workloads that scale with core count, cache capacity, and memory bandwidth. Its wins include data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, integer math, multithreaded performance, physics calculations, and random string sorting. The Intel part counters in single-threaded tasks, prime number finding, and floating-point math.

For multithreaded productivity, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear leader. Its passmark_multithread score of 45231 beats the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H's 34027 by 32.9%. That gap widens dramatically in integer math, where the AMD processor scores 152414 versus 85479, a 78.3% advantage. Data compression shows a 65.7% lead (554760 vs 334711), and extended instructions favor AMD by 70.4% (45666 vs 26805). These results indicate the AMD chip is better suited for rendering, code compilation, scientific computing, and other parallel workloads.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H wins where single-core responsiveness matters most. Its passmark_single_thread score of 4334 beats the AMD's 3927 by 9.4%. In floating-point math, Intel leads 109123 to 99548, an 8.8% margin. The prime number test also goes to Intel, scoring 335 versus 320, a 4.5% edge. These wins suggest the Intel chip may feel snappier in lightly threaded applications, legacy software, and tasks that depend heavily on a single fast core.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 posts an average benchmark score of 90541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H averages 41621, placing it in the 88th percentile. The AMD part sits near workstation-class Xeon processors in the database rankings, while the Intel chip competes with high-end mobile Core i7 parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors take fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses Zen 5 architecture on the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H uses Arrow Lake architecture on the Arrow Lake-H codename, built on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. Both are active mobile parts with locked multipliers.

Core configuration differs substantially. The AMD chip has 12 cores and 24 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Intel chip has 16 cores but only 16 threads, meaning it does not use Hyper-Threading in this configuration. Despite having four more physical cores, the Intel part offers eight fewer threads than the AMD part.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The AMD processor allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 64 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel processor has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 24 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's larger L3 cache, combined with its thread count, helps explain its strong performance in data-heavy workloads.

Memory subsystems also differ. The AMD chip supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, capping at 102.4 GB/s. The AMD part has more than double the memory bandwidth, a critical factor for integrated graphics and memory-intensive compute tasks. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity favors Intel in generation but AMD in lane count. The Intel chip uses Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD chip uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the AMD part pairs with Radeon 8060S, while the Intel part uses Arc Graphics 140T.

Physical specifications reveal packaging differences. The AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP11 with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel chip uses Intel BGA 2049 with no recorded die size. The AMD part has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel part has a TDP of 28 watts. Clock speeds favor Intel at the top end: the Intel chip boosts to 5.30 GHz from a 2.20 GHz base, while the AMD chip boosts to 5.00 GHz from a 3.20 GHz base. The AMD part has a higher base clock but a lower boost clock.

Release dates place the Intel chip first. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H launched on 2025-01-12, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 launched on 2026-01-05.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has 16 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores. However, the AMD chip has 24 threads versus 16 threads for Intel, because AMD enables simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H wins the passmark_single_thread test with a score of 4334, which is 9.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392's score of 3927.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H supports dual-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 boosts to 5.00 GHz. The AMD chip has a higher base clock at 3.20 GHz versus 2.20 GHz for Intel.

Q: Which processor has a higher overall benchmark percentile?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H sits in the 88th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 | Intel Core Ultra 7 265H |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 12 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Arrow Lake-H |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | LPDDR5X | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 8060S | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Release date | 2026-01-05 | 2025-01-12 |

| Part number | 100-000001979 | SRQAQ |

| Average benchmark score | 90541 | 41621 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 96 | 88 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the comparison belongs to AMD in integer math. The passmark_integer_math test shows the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scoring 152414 against 85479 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H, a 78.3% advantage. This result aligns with the AMD chip's 24 threads and 64 MB of L3 cache, which allow it to process large integer workloads in parallel without repeatedly missing cache.

Data compression follows a similar pattern. The AMD chip scores 554760 in passmark_data_compression, beating Intel's 334711 by 65.7%. Extended instructions show a 70.4% lead for AMD, with scores of 45666 and 26805 respectively. These two tests indicate that the AMD processor handles repetitive, data-dense operations more efficiently, likely due to its larger cache and higher memory bandwidth.

Multithreaded performance gives AMD a 32.9% win. The passmark_multithread score of 45231 for AMD versus 34027 for Intel confirms that the thread count advantage translates directly into throughput. Physics calculations also favor AMD, with a 15.6% margin (2887 vs 2497). Random string sorting goes to AMD by 46%, scoring 59487 versus 40742.

Encryption is a closer contest. The passmark_data_encryption test shows AMD ahead at 27784 versus 26005, a 6.8% margin. This smaller gap suggests that both processors have capable cryptographic instruction sets, with the AMD chip's additional threads providing a modest edge.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H wins the single-threaded tests by a clear margin. In passmark_single_thread, Intel scores 4334 against 3927 for AMD, a 9.4% advantage. The same scores appear in the passmark_singlethread test, confirming consistency. This result reflects the Intel chip's higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz and its Arrow Lake architecture's focus on single-core responsiveness.

Floating-point math goes to Intel by 8.8%. The Intel chip scores 109123 in passmark_floating_point_math, while the AMD chip scores 99548. Prime number finding also favors Intel, with a score of 335 versus 320, a 4.5% margin. These wins indicate that Intel retains an edge in workloads that depend on high-frequency scalar execution.

The overall win count stands at 7 for AMD and 4 for Intel. The AMD processor's average benchmark score of 90541 places it near workstation Xeons in the database, with its closest rival, the Intel Xeon 654, scoring 90717 and trailing by 0.2%. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H's average score of 41621 places it near the Intel Core 7 251TE, which scores 41650 and leads by 0.1%. The database places the AMD chip in the 96th percentile and the Intel chip in the 88th percentile, confirming that the AMD part targets a higher performance tier despite consuming more power.