AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

# AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Processor N150

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and Intel Processor N150 occupy opposite corners of the mobile processor market. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 5 part from the Strix Halo family, built on TSMC's 4 nm process with a 55 W TDP. The Intel Processor N150 is a 4-core, 4-thread Twin Lake chip on Intel's 10 nm process, drawing just 6 W. The database's average benchmark scores reflect this gulf: the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 averages 90,541 points, while the N150 averages 1,025 points. That places the AMD part in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel chip sits in the 28th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins in every single benchmark category recorded in the database. Its multithreaded score of 45,231 dwarfs the N150's Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 2,590.5, though these are different test suites. The AMD part's single-thread score of 3,927 in PassMark is more than four times the N150's Cinebench R23 single-core score of 935, again from different benchmarks but indicative of the performance chasm.

The Intel Processor N150's wins are not in raw performance but in efficiency and simplicity. Its 6 W TDP is a fraction of the AMD part's 55 W TDP. The N150 uses a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s. For workloads that demand sustained multi-core throughput, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is clearly the superior choice. For tasks that require minimal power draw and modest compute, the N150's low TDP makes it a viable option in fanless or passively cooled designs.

The benchmark data shows a clear split: the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built for heavy compute, while the N150 is built for lightweight, power-conscious operation. The AMD part's PassMark physics score of 2,887 and floating point math score of 99,548 indicate strong number-crunching ability. The N150 has no comparable PassMark entries in the database, only Cinebench results, suggesting its performance envelope is far narrower.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap between these two processors is substantial. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses AMD's Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Processor N150 uses the Twin Lake architecture, which the database lists as part of the Alder Lake-N generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

Core configurations differ sharply. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel part has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The base clock on the N150 is extraordinarily low, suggesting aggressive power gating and a design focused on idle efficiency.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor N150 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's 64 MB L3 is more than ten times larger than the N150's 6 MB, which directly impacts repeated data access workloads.

Memory support reveals different design goals. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Intel Processor N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The bandwidth differential is roughly 6.7 to 1, which will heavily favor the AMD part in memory-bound tasks.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The AMD chip offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel chip offers PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 carries a Radeon 8060S, while the N150 carries UHD Graphics 730.

The Verdict

The data dictates a straightforward verdict for compute-heavy users: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is overwhelmingly more capable. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals in the database, the Intel Xeon 654 (average score 90,717, 0.2% lower) and AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (average score 91,199, 0.7% lower), show that the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 competes at the workstation tier. It also edges out the Intel Xeon w7-2575X (average score 88,172, 2.7% higher delta for the AMD part) and the Intel Xeon 6736P (average score 87,864, 3% higher delta for the AMD part).

The Intel Processor N150, by contrast, sits in the 28th percentile, with nearest rivals including the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T (average score 1,024, 0.1% difference) and the Intel Core i3-4340 (average score 1,026, 0.1% difference). This places the N150 at entry-level performance, roughly comparable to a decade-old desktop chip.

For users who need maximum multi-core throughput, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear selection. For users who need minimal power consumption and only light compute, the N150's 6 W TDP makes it appropriate for small, low-power systems. The database does not record any scenario where the N150 outperforms the Ryzen AI Max+ 392.

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Processor N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What are the TDP ratings of these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a TDP of 55 W. The Intel Processor N150 has a TDP of 6 W.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor N150 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Processor N150 supports 38.4 GB/s over a single-channel bus supporting DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90,541. The Intel Processor N150 has an average benchmark score of 1,025.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor N150 does not support ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two processors, so comparisons rely on their respective benchmark suites. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392's PassMark multi-thread score of 45,231 indicates a processor that can handle heavily parallelized workloads. Its PassMark integer math score of 152,414 and floating point math score of 99,548 show strength in both arithmetic domains.

The N150's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 2,590.5 and single-core score of 935 demonstrate its modest compute capacity. In Cinebench R15, the N150 scores 422.5 multi-core and 153.15 single-core. These are the only benchmarks recorded for the N150 in the database, and they pale in comparison to the AMD part's PassMark results.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 also delivers strong results in specialized tasks. Its PassMark data compression score of 554,760 and random string sorting score of 59,487 indicate fast data manipulation. The data encryption score of 27,784 and extended instructions score of 45,666 show capable cryptographic and SIMD work. The find prime numbers score of 320 rounds out the integer-focused benchmarks.

In the context of its nearest rivals, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits within 1% of the Intel Xeon 654 (0.2% lower) and AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (0.7% lower). It leads the Intel Xeon w7-2575X by 2.7% and the Intel Xeon 6736P by 3%. The N150's nearest rivals are clustered within 0.2% of its average score, confirming it is a commodity-level chip.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel Processor N150 uses Intel BGA 1264. The AMD part's process node is 4 nm at TSMC, while the Intel part uses 10 nm at Intel. The AMD die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded.

Clock speeds differ substantially: the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The N150 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The AMD part has a 55 W TDP versus the N150's 6 W TDP.

Cache configs are distinct: the AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, while the Intel part has 96 KB L1 per core and 2 MB shared L2. The AMD part has 64 MB shared L3, the Intel part has 6 MB shared L3. Memory support shows LPDDR5X for AMD versus DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 for Intel. The memory bus is quad-channel for AMD and single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s for AMD and 38.4 GB/s for Intel. ECC is supported on AMD only. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD and Gen 3 with 9 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S for AMD and UHD Graphics 730 for Intel. The AMD part has a 2026 release date, while the N150 has a 2024 release date. Both have active production status and neither has a launch MSRP recorded. The AMD multiplier is locked, and the Intel multiplier is also locked. Part numbers are 100-000001979 for AMD and SRPNR for Intel.