AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and Intel Core Ultra X9 378H are both active mobile processors aimed at high-performance laptops, but they deliver distinctly different results across the recorded benchmark suite. The database shows the AMD part with an average benchmark score of 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel part averages 47,468, sitting in the 89th percentile. The AMD chip’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 654 (average score 90,717, a 0.2% difference) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (91,199, 0.7% difference), indicating it competes near the top of the desktop-class mobile segment. The Intel chip’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 (47,527, 0.1% difference) and the Intel Core i7-13700KF (47,330, 0.3% difference), show it performs more like a mid-range desktop processor. The head-to-head results reveal a split: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins five of the eleven shared tests, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins six.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin of victory belongs to the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 in the passmark integer math test, where it scores 152,414 against the Intel part’s 92,603. That is a 64.6% advantage, the biggest single-test gap in the comparison. This result indicates the AMD chip’s integer processing throughput is substantially higher, a trait that often shows up in general productivity tasks, database operations, and code compilation. The AMD processor also wins decisively in extended instructions, scoring 45,666 versus 31,315, a 45.8% lead. This test covers workloads that use specialized CPU instruction sets, and the AMD part’s margin here suggests its execution resources for such operations are far more abundant.

Data compression favors the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 as well, with a score of 554,760 versus 386,591, a 43.5% difference. Compression workloads rely heavily on memory bandwidth and multi-threaded efficiency, and the AMD chip’s 256.0 GB/s quad-channel memory subsystem likely contributes to this outcome. Random string sorting also goes to AMD, 59,487 versus 44,648, a 33.2% margin. This test is sensitive to cache hierarchy and memory latency, and the AMD part’s larger shared L3 cache (64 MB versus 18 MB) appears to provide an advantage. The multi-thread test, which aggregates overall parallel performance, shows AMD ahead at 45,231 versus 38,298, an 18.1% lead. That result aligns with the AMD chip having 24 threads versus the Intel chip’s 16 threads.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H counters with wins in several tests. Floating point math is its biggest victory, scoring 114,500 versus 99,548, a 13.1% margin. This is notable because the AMD part has a higher average benchmark score overall, yet the Intel chip’s floating-point execution units deliver more throughput in this specific workload. Physics simulation goes to Intel, 3,404 versus 2,887, a 15.2% lead. The physics test often rewards higher single-core performance and efficient branch handling, both of which appear stronger on the Intel side. Single-thread performance is clearly Intel’s domain: the Core Ultra X9 378H scores 4,453 versus 3,927, an 11.8% advantage. This same margin appears in both the passmark single-thread and passmark singlethread entries, confirming consistency.

Data encryption is a narrow Intel win, 29,840 versus 27,784, a 6.9% difference. Encryption workloads depend on cryptographic instruction throughput, and the Intel chip’s design handles this slightly better. Prime number finding also favors Intel, 357 versus 320, a 10.4% lead. This test stresses integer division and loop efficiency, and the Intel part’s higher single-core clock behavior appears to help. The final tally is five wins for AMD and six for Intel, but the magnitudes differ sharply. AMD’s wins are often large (18% to 65% margins), while Intel’s wins are mostly single-digit to mid-teens percentages. The exception is Intel’s 13.1% floating-point win, which is still smaller than AMD’s three biggest margins.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins in workloads that scale with thread count, memory bandwidth, and large shared caches. The integer math result, with a 64.6% lead, points to tasks like data processing, financial modeling, and server-style workloads where many parallel integer operations are needed. The extended instructions win, 45.8% ahead, suggests applications that use SIMD or specialized instruction sets, such as multimedia encoding or scientific computing, will run faster on the AMD chip. Data compression and random string sorting, both wins for AMD, indicate that archiving, database sorting, and file management tasks benefit from the AMD part’s 64 MB shared L3 cache and quad-channel memory bandwidth. The multi-thread test result, 18.1% ahead, confirms that any fully parallel workload, from video rendering to software compilation, will favor the AMD chip.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins in single-thread-sensitive tasks. The single-thread score of 4,453 versus 3,927, an 11.8% margin, means that applications with limited parallelism, such as legacy code, interactive scripting, or lightly threaded games, will run faster on the Intel part. The physics test, a 15.2% win, often depends on high-frequency single-core performance plus efficient memory access, and the Intel chip delivers that. Floating point math, a 13.1% win, indicates that scientific simulations, numerical analysis, and certain rendering paths that rely on floating-point throughput will be quicker on the Intel chip. The encryption win, 6.9% ahead, matters for VPNs, secure file transfers, and database encryption, though the margin is modest. Prime number finding, a 10.4% win, is a niche workload but shows the Intel chip’s strength in tight loops that cannot use many threads.

The pattern is clear: AMD leads where many cores and memory bandwidth matter, while Intel leads where single-core speed and floating-point density matter. For a user who runs heavily multi-threaded productivity suites, compression tools, or data analytics, the AMD chip’s larger wins in integer math, extended instructions, and compression will dominate. For a user who prioritizes single-thread responsiveness, physics simulations, or floating-point-heavy code, the Intel chip’s wins in those areas will be more noticeable.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Halo, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The AMD chip’s cache hierarchy consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a 64 MB shared L3 cache. It uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and supports ECC memory. The socket is AMD Socket FP11, and the chip provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU-only lanes. Its integrated graphics are the Radeon 8060S.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is based on the Panther Lake codename, from the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. It has 16 cores but only 16 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel chip’s cache is 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. It also uses LPDDR5X memory but over a dual-channel bus, providing 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and does not support ECC. The socket is Intel BGA 2540, and the chip provides PCIe Gen 5 with 4 CPU-only lanes. Its integrated graphics are the Arc B390.

The process node difference is small but meaningful: Intel uses a 3 nm process versus AMD’s 4 nm, which may contribute to the Intel chip’s lower TDP of 25 watts versus AMD’s 55 watts. The AMD chip’s higher thread count (24 versus 16) and larger L3 cache (64 MB versus 18 MB) are major structural differences that explain its multi-thread advantages. The Intel chip’s higher per-core L1 (192 KB versus 80 KB) and L2 (2.5 MB versus 1 MB) may help its single-thread performance, as does its higher single-thread benchmark score. Memory bandwidth is a clear AMD advantage: 256.0 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s, a consequence of quad-channel versus dual-channel memory buses. The PCIe configuration also differs: AMD offers 16 Gen 4 lanes, while Intel offers 4 Gen 5 lanes, which changes how external devices connect, though the recorded data does not show direct performance comparisons for this.

The release dates differ, with the AMD chip having a recorded release date of 2026-01-05 and the Intel chip 2026-04-03. Both are listed as mobile market segment parts with active production status. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP, so pricing data is absent from this analysis. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported according to the database.

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the stronger choice for multi-threaded, memory-intensive workloads. Its wins in integer math (64.6% ahead), extended instructions (45.8% ahead), data compression (43.5% ahead), random string sorting (33.2% ahead), and the multi-thread test (18.1% ahead) are all substantial. The 24 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a structural basis for these results. The AMD chip’s average benchmark score of 90,541 versus 47,468 for the Intel chip shows a large overall performance gap, though that average includes tests not shared between the two parts.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is the better choice for single-thread and floating-point-heavy tasks. Its single-thread score is 11.8% higher, its physics score is 15.2% higher, and its floating-point math score is 13.1% higher. The lower 25-watt TDP also suggests it may fit into thinner chassis, though power consumption figures beyond TDP are not in the database. The Intel chip’s wins are smaller in magnitude than AMD’s biggest wins, but they cover a different workload area. For users who run lightly threaded applications, the Intel chip’s higher single-thread performance will be noticeable. For users who run heavily parallel code, the AMD chip’s larger margins in multi-thread tests make it the clear pick.

The percentile placement reinforces this: the AMD chip sits in the 96th percentile overall, while the Intel chip sits in the 89th percentile. The nearest rivals for each chip confirm their tier. The AMD chip competes with the Intel Xeon 654 and AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX, both desktop-class parts with average scores around 90,000. The Intel chip competes with the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 and Intel Core i7-13700KF, parts with average scores around 47,000. That places the AMD chip in a higher performance class overall, despite the Intel chip’s specific workload wins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H scores 4,453 in the passmark single-thread test, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927. That is an 11.8% advantage for Intel.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 leads by 64.6% in the passmark integer math test, scoring 152,414 versus 92,603 for the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The AMD chip has 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth via a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus, while the Intel chip has 153.6 GB/s via a dual-channel LPDDR5X bus.

Q: Does the Intel chip support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H does not support ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 does.

Q: How many threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 24 threads from 12 cores, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has 16 threads from 16 cores.

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 Ultra X9 378H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H uses 16 cores and 16 threads. The base clock is 3.20 GHz for AMD versus 2.00 GHz for Intel, though both boost to 5.00 GHz. The AMD chip has a TDP of 55 watts, the Intel chip 25 watts. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540. The process node is 4 nm (TSMC) for AMD versus 3 nm (Intel) for Intel. The AMD chip has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. The Intel chip has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is LPDDR5X for both, but the AMD chip uses a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel chip uses a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the AMD chip but not on the Intel chip. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S for AMD and Arc B390 for Intel. The release dates are 2026-01-05 for AMD and 2026-04-03 for Intel. Neither chip has a launch MSRP recorded, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.