AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear split between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, with the AMD part taking 6 wins and Intel taking 5. However, the magnitude of the victories is heavily one-sided. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 dominates in throughput-oriented workloads, while Intel holds a narrower but consistent advantage in latency-sensitive and single-threaded tests.

The largest margin in the entire comparison belongs to the AMD chip in PassMark integer math, where it scores 152,414 against Intel’s 87,284. That is a 74.6% advantage, a massive gap that reflects the AMD part’s ability to sustain high integer throughput across its 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, despite having 16 cores, is limited to 16 threads and cannot compete in this heavily parallel workload.

Data compression shows a similarly large gap. AMD scores 554,760 versus Intel’s 352,365, a 57.4% lead. Extended instructions also favor AMD heavily, with 45,666 versus 29,138, a 56.7% advantage. These two tests indicate that AMD’s Zen 5 architecture delivers substantially stronger execution in SIMD-heavy and data-processing tasks.

Random string sorting is another AMD win, with 59,487 versus 42,135, a 41.2% margin. This test often rewards memory bandwidth and cache efficiency, and AMD’s 64 MB shared L3 cache and quad-channel LPDDR5X memory at 256.0 GB/s likely explain the result. Multi-threaded performance also favors AMD, with 45,231 versus 35,399, a 27.8% lead, confirming that the extra threads and larger cache pay off in overall parallel workloads.

Data encryption is the closest AMD win, at 27,784 versus 27,150, just a 2.3% margin. Both parts handle encryption workloads similarly, but AMD edges ahead. This is the only benchmark in the head-to-head where the two are nearly tied.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins all of its five benchmarks by single-digit margins. Single-thread performance goes to Intel, with 4,218 versus 3,927, a 6.9% lead. The same result appears in the duplicated singlethread test. Floating-point math also favors Intel, 108,527 versus 99,548, an 8.3% advantage. Prime number finding goes to Intel, 341 versus 320, a 6.2% margin. Physics simulation is Intel’s narrowest win, 3,028 versus 2,887, a 4.7% lead.

These Intel wins are consistent but modest. The largest Intel margin is 8.3% in floating-point math, which is far smaller than AMD’s 74.6% integer win. In aggregate, the AMD part’s average benchmark score is 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Intel’s average is 43,210, in the 88th percentile. The AMD chip’s nearest rival is the Intel Xeon 654, which scores 90,717, a 0.2% difference, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, at 43,326, also a 0.3% difference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-threaded benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,231 in PassMark multi-thread, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H scores 35,399. AMD leads by 27.8%.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark by a large margin?

A: No. Intel’s largest win is in floating-point math, where it scores 108,527 versus AMD’s 99,548, an 8.3% lead. All other Intel wins are below 7%.

Q: How do the two compare in single-thread performance?

A: Intel wins single-thread with 4,218 versus AMD’s 3,927, a 6.9% advantage. This applies to both single-thread tests in the database.

Q: Which chip has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90,541, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H averages 43,210. AMD also sits in the 96th percentile versus Intel’s 88th.

Q: What is the closest head-to-head result?

A: Data encryption is the closest, with AMD at 27,784 and Intel at 27,150. AMD wins by only 2.3%.

Q: Does the Intel chip’s higher core count translate to wins in parallel tasks?

A: No. Despite having 16 cores versus AMD’s 12, Intel loses multi-thread (35,399 versus 45,231), integer math (87,284 versus 152,414), and data compression (352,365 versus 554,760). Intel’s 16 threads versus AMD’s 24 threads is a likely factor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses Panther Lake, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. Both are mobile parts, but their internal designs diverge sharply.

AMD’s chip has 12 cores and 24 threads, relying on simultaneous multi-threading to double its thread count. Intel’s part has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no multi-threading support. This explains why AMD’s thread count is higher despite fewer physical cores. The core count difference is significant: Intel has 4 more physical cores, but AMD has 8 more threads.

Cache hierarchies also differ notably. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. Intel’s per-core L1 and L2 caches are larger, but AMD’s total L3 cache is more than 3.5 times larger.

Memory architecture is another clear split. AMD supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but over a dual-channel bus, yielding 115.2 GB/s. That is less than half of AMD’s bandwidth. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

The process nodes differ, with AMD on 4 nm and Intel on 3 nm. Both use their respective foundries, TSMC for AMD and Intel for the Core Ultra. AMD’s die is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel’s die size is not recorded in the database.

PCIe support also differs. AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. Intel’s newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD provides more lanes.

Integrated graphics are distinct as well. AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 8060S graphics, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics. Both are integrated solutions, but the database does not include graphics benchmark scores for either.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every major specification field. Core and thread counts are the most obvious: AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, Intel has 16 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds also differ, with AMD base clock at 3.20 GHz and boost at 5.00 GHz, while Intel runs at 2.10 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost. AMD has both a higher base and higher boost clock.

Thermal design power is substantially different. AMD is rated at 55 W, while Intel is rated at 25 W. This means Intel is designed for lower power consumption, but AMD’s higher TDP likely contributes to its superior multi-thread performance.

Sockets are not interchangeable. AMD uses Socket FP11, Intel uses BGA 2540. The memory bus width differs, with AMD at quad-channel and Intel at dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s for AMD versus 115.2 GB/s for Intel. ECC support exists only on AMD.

Cache configurations differ in every level. AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. PCIe generations and lane counts differ: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

Process node and foundry also differ, with AMD on TSMC 4 nm and Intel on Intel 3 nm. The architecture names are Zen 5 for AMD and Panther Lake for Intel. Release dates are one day apart, with Intel launching on 2026-01-04 and AMD on 2026-01-05. Both are active production parts with locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins in workloads that benefit from high memory bandwidth, large shared cache, and many threads. Its 64 MB L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s quad-channel memory make it strong for data compression, where it leads by 57.4%, and random string sorting, where it leads by 41.2%. Integer math is its dominant category, with a 74.6% lead, indicating excellent raw ALU throughput. Extended instructions show a 56.7% advantage, making it the choice for SIMD-heavy code such as media encoding or scientific computing. Multi-threaded workloads generally favor AMD, with a 27.8% lead in multi-thread score. The 96th percentile ranking places it among the top CPUs in the database.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins in latency-sensitive and lightly threaded tasks. Its single-thread score of 4,218 beats AMD by 6.9%, making it better for responsiveness in everyday applications and legacy software that relies on one or two cores. Floating-point math favors Intel by 8.3%, which could benefit certain physics or simulation workloads. Prime number finding and physics tests also go to Intel, with 6.2% and 4.7% leads respectively. The lower 25 W TDP suggests it is better suited for thermally constrained designs, though the database does not include power measurements. Its 88th percentile ranking is solid, but below AMD’s.

The split is clear: AMD wins throughput and parallel processing, Intel wins single-thread and floating-point tasks. The AMD part’s average benchmark score of 90,541 versus Intel’s 43,210 shows that, on average, AMD delivers more than twice the measured performance across the recorded benchmarks. However, Intel’s wins in single-thread and floating-point should not be dismissed, as those are common in everyday use. The data indicates that for heavy parallel workloads, AMD is the stronger choice, while Intel holds the edge in lighter, single-threaded scenarios.