AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H across eleven PassMark workloads. The AMD part wins six of those tests, while the Intel chip takes five, but the magnitude of the victories differs sharply. AMD’s largest advantage appears in integer math, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152,414 against Intel’s 83,111, a delta of 83.4 percent. Data compression also heavily favors AMD, with 554,760 versus 336,177, a 65 percent lead. Extended instructions show a similar pattern: 45,666 for AMD and 27,898 for Intel, a 63.7 percent gap. Random string sorting goes to AMD by 45.1 percent, with scores of 59,487 and 40,990. Multithread performance, the aggregate workload score, lands at 45,231 for AMD and 33,978 for Intel, a 33.1 percent advantage. The smallest AMD win is in data encryption, 27,784 versus 26,345, a 5.5 percent margin.

Intel’s wins are all narrow, with the largest being a 3.6 percent edge in single-thread performance, 4,072 versus 3,927. The same delta appears in the duplicate singlethread entry, which records identical scores. Floating-point math goes to Intel by 3.5 percent, 103,128 versus 99,548. Prime number finding favors Intel by 2.1 percent, 327 versus 320. Physics is nearly a tie, with Intel ahead by just 0.3 percent, 2,895 versus 2,887. The overall win count, six for AMD and five for Intel, understates the performance difference in throughput-oriented tasks, since AMD’s victories are substantially larger in percentage terms. The average benchmark score in the database reflects this: AMD sits at 90,541, while Intel sits at 41,215, a gap that places AMD in the 96th percentile of all CPUs and Intel in the 87th.

For context, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392’s nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717 (delta -0.2 percent), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 91,199 (delta -0.7 percent), the Intel Xeon w7-2575X at 88,172 (delta 2.7 percent), and the Intel Xeon 6736P at 87,864 (delta 3 percent). The Core Ultra 7 356H’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41,208 (delta 0 percent), the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at 41,263 (delta -0.1 percent), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41,376 (delta -0.4 percent), and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H at 40,967 (delta 0.6 percent). This means the AMD part competes with workstation-class Xeon processors, while the Intel part trades with mid-range mobile and desktop chips.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the multithread benchmark?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,231, which is 33.1 percent ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H’s 33,978.

Q: Does the Intel chip have any meaningful single-thread advantage?

A: Yes, but it is small. Intel scores 4,072 in single-thread, which is 3.6 percent higher than AMD’s 3,927.

Q: How do the two compare in floating-point math?

A: Intel leads with 103,128 versus 99,548, a 3.5 percent margin, which is one of only two Intel wins above 2 percent.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in either direction?

A: AMD’s 83.4 percent lead in integer math is the largest recorded delta, followed by AMD’s 65 percent lead in data compression.

Q: Which processor has the higher overall percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is in the 87th.

Q: Are there any near-ties in the benchmark data?

A: Physics is essentially even, with Intel ahead by 0.3 percent (2,895 versus 2,887). Prime number finding is also close, with Intel ahead by 2.1 percent.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different silicon designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. AMD’s architecture is Zen 5 under the codename Strix Halo, part of the Ryzen AI Max generation. Intel’s architecture is Panther Lake, under the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, specifically Panther Lake-H.

Core counts differ substantially. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 16 cores and 16 threads. This means AMD uses simultaneous multithreading, doubling its thread count, whereas Intel runs one thread per core in this configuration. Despite having fewer cores, AMD’s multithread score is higher, indicating that its Zen 5 cores and thread scheduling deliver more aggregate throughput in the recorded PassMark workloads.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel’s per-core L1 and L2 are larger, but AMD’s shared L3 is more than three times larger, which likely explains its dominance in data compression and extended instructions.

Memory support differs as well. AMD supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel interface, yielding 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel interface, yielding 115.2 GB/s. AMD’s bandwidth advantage is roughly 2.2 times, and this directly contributes to its leads in memory-sensitive workloads like random string sorting and data compression. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

The integrated graphics solutions are distinct. AMD uses the Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics. The database does not record graphics benchmark scores, so no performance comparison is possible from the available data. Both processors target the mobile segment, but their sockets differ: AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, and Intel uses Intel BGA 2540. PCIe support also differs, with AMD offering Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes and Intel offering Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes.

Clock speeds show a trade-off. AMD’s base clock is 3.20 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz, while Intel’s base clock is 1.90 GHz with a boost of 4.70 GHz. Intel’s higher single-thread score suggests its boost behavior is more effective in lightly threaded tests, despite the lower rated boost. Thermal design power also differs: AMD is rated at 55 watts, while Intel is rated at 25 watts. The database does not record measured power consumption, so the real-world efficiency relationship remains unclear from this data alone.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a clear division of roles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the stronger choice for heavy parallel workloads. Its 33.1 percent multithread lead, 83.4 percent integer math lead, 65 percent data compression lead, and 63.7 percent extended instructions lead make it the dominant processor for compute-intensive tasks that scale across threads and memory bandwidth. The 96th percentile ranking, alongside workstation Xeon rivals, reinforces this position. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 64 MB of shared L3 provide the foundation for these wins.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is the stronger choice for single-thread responsiveness. Its 3.6 percent single-thread lead and 3.5 percent floating-point math lead, while modest, indicate an advantage in lightly threaded workloads. The 25 watt TDP also suggests a lower power envelope, though the database does not include measured power figures. The 87th percentile ranking places it in the upper tier of all CPUs, but its nearest rivals are mid-range mobile and desktop chips, not workstation processors.

For users prioritizing multithread throughput, data-heavy tasks, or memory bandwidth, the AMD part is the clear winner. For users prioritizing single-thread speed or operating within a lower power envelope, the Intel part has the edge. The 5.5 percent data encryption win for AMD and the near-tie in physics (Intel ahead by 0.3 percent) indicate that the two are closely matched in certain specific workloads, but the overall pattern favors AMD in aggregate performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 | Intel Core Ultra 7 356H |

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

| Cores | 12 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max (Zen 5, Strix Halo) | Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

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

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2026-01-04 |

| Part Number | 100-000001979 | SA4RGQ9EU |

Both processors have locked multipliers and active production status. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database. The release dates are one day apart, with Intel listed first. The L1 and L2 cache differences favor Intel on a per-core basis, but the shared L3 and memory bandwidth heavily favor AMD. The process node favors Intel at 3 nm versus 4 nm, but the foundry differs, so direct process comparison is not straightforward. The memory bus width difference, quad-channel versus dual-channel, explains the bandwidth gap. PCIe generation favors Intel (Gen 5 versus Gen 4), while lane count favors AMD (16 versus 12).