AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 dominates the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H in nearly every measured workload, winning 13 of 15 head-to-head comparisons. The most extreme margin comes in PassMark integer math, where AMD scores 200665 against Intel’s 62070, a 223.3% advantage. Data compression follows at 146.4% (690650 vs 280340), and Cinebench R15 multi-core at 125.9% (5463 vs 2418). Extended instructions show a 129.6% lead (56346 vs 24542), and random string sorting 121.4% (76177 vs 34402). These are not marginal differences; the AMD part is delivering roughly double or more in several throughput-oriented tests.

Multi-threaded rendering confirms the pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD scores 35314 against 23991, a 47.2% lead. PassMark multi-thread shows 54934 vs 28545, a 92.4% gap. Floating-point math favors AMD by 56.1% (128682 vs 82415), data encryption by 66.5% (35455 vs 21291), and physics by 29.8% (3481 vs 2682). Even the nearest margin, PassMark find prime numbers, goes to AMD at 303 vs 299, a slim 1.3% difference. The only competitive single-thread result in PassMark goes to AMD by 3.3% (4147 vs 4013 in both single-thread and singlethread entries).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H takes exactly two wins, both in Cinebench single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3387 against AMD’s 2044, a 39.7% advantage. In Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel leads 341 vs 316, a 7.3% margin. This gives Intel a clear, if narrow, single-thread rendering edge, while AMD counterbalances with a PassMark single-thread win. The overall benchmark average tells the same story: AMD sits at 77740 average score, Intel at 34485. AMD’s percentile rank among all CPUs is 95, while Intel’s is 84.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite design philosophies. AMD uses Zen 5 architecture on TSMC’s 4 nm process, with the codename Strix Halo and a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². Intel uses Panther Lake architecture on its own 3 nm process, codenamed Panther Lake and belonging to the Core Ultra Series 3. Both have 16 cores, but the thread counts diverge sharply: AMD supports 32 threads, Intel only 16. This explains much of the multi-threaded gap, as AMD can process twice as many concurrent threads.

Clock speeds reinforce the difference. AMD has a 3.00 GHz base clock and 5.10 GHz boost clock. Intel has a 1.90 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. AMD’s higher boost, combined with simultaneous multithreading, drives its large multi-core leads. Intel’s higher single-core Cinebench scores likely stem from its newer 3 nm process and Panther Lake core design, which appears to deliver stronger single-thread rendering efficiency despite lower raw clocks.

Cache configurations differ substantially. AMD provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and only 18 MB shared L3. AMD’s 64 MB L3 is more than triple Intel’s, which benefits workloads with large working sets. Intel’s larger per-core L1 and L2 may help latency-sensitive single-thread tasks.

Memory architecture also separates the two. AMD supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. AMD’s memory bandwidth is 122% higher, a critical factor for integrated graphics and memory-intensive compute. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Intel’s newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD provides more lanes.

Power targets are far apart. AMD has a 55 W TDP, Intel 25 W. That 30 W difference reflects AMD’s higher performance envelope and also explains why AMD achieves such large multi-core wins. Production status is active for both, with AMD released on 2025-01-05 and Intel on 2026-01-04. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded. Both are mobile-market parts with integrated graphics: AMD’s Radeon 8060S versus Intel’s Xe3 Graphics. Both have locked multipliers.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the performance leader for multi-threaded, memory-bandwidth-heavy, and compute-intensive workloads. It wins 13 of 15 direct comparisons, with margins ranging from 1.3% to 223.3%. Its 32 threads, 64 MB L3, quad-channel memory, and 55 W TDP combine to produce an average benchmark score of 77740, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. For rendering, compression, encryption, math, and general parallel throughput, AMD is the stronger processor.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins only in Cinebench single-core tests, with a 39.7% lead in R23 and a 7.3% lead in R15. Its 3 nm Panther Lake architecture delivers superior single-thread rendering efficiency, and its 25 W TDP suggests a lower power footprint. However, its PassMark single-thread score is slightly behind AMD (4013 vs 4147, a 3.3% deficit), so the single-thread advantage is not universal. Intel’s average benchmark score of 34485 places it in the 84th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700HX at just 0.2% below.

For users prioritizing multi-core performance, AMD is the choice. For users whose workloads depend specifically on Cinebench-style single-thread rendering, Intel has an edge, though that edge does not extend to PassMark single-thread. The AMD part also carries a much larger memory bandwidth figure, 256.0 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s, which matters for integrated graphics and data-heavy tasks. The verdict from the recorded data: AMD wins the overall performance crown by a wide margin, while Intel claims a narrower, workload-specific single-thread rendering win.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 | Intel Core Ultra 5 336H |

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

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (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 | 2025-01-05 | 2026-01-04 |

| Part Number | 100-000001099 | SA4RD |

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 threads, exactly half.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between them?

A: PassMark integer math shows the biggest gap. AMD scores 200665 against Intel’s 62070, a 223.3% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, Intel wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 39.7% (3387 vs 2044) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 7.3% (341 vs 316).

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: AMD provides 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. Intel provides 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X bus. AMD’s bandwidth is more than double.

Q: What are the percentile rankings?

A: AMD ranks in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Intel ranks in the 84th percentile.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: AMD has a 5.10 GHz boost clock. Intel has a 4.60 GHz boost clock.

Q: Do both chips have ECC memory support?

A: No. AMD supports ECC memory. Intel does not.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: AMD has a 55 W TDP. Intel has a 25 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins in every multi-threaded benchmark category in the database. It leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core (5463 vs 2418), Cinebench R23 multi-core (35314 vs 23991), PassMark multi-thread (54934 vs 28545), and PassMark physics (3481 vs 2682). It also wins all specialized compute tests: data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating-point math, integer math, and random string sorting. Its 32 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the superior choice for parallel rendering, scientific computing, encryption workloads, and any task that scales across cores.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins specifically in Cinebench single-core rendering. Its R23 single-core score of 3387 beats AMD’s 2044 by 39.7%, and its R15 single-core score of 341 beats AMD’s 316 by 7.3%. The data suggests Intel’s Panther Lake architecture on 3 nm delivers strong single-thread rendering efficiency, potentially useful for lightly threaded rendering tasks or applications that depend heavily on single-core Cinebench performance. However, Intel loses the PassMark single-thread test to AMD by 3.3% (4013 vs 4147), so the single-thread win does not generalize across all single-thread benchmarks.

For users choosing based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD part is the all-around performer with 13 wins, a 95th percentile rank, and a 77740 average score. The Intel part is a niche single-thread rendering specialist with 2 wins, an 84th percentile rank, and a 34485 average score. The use-case split is clear: AMD for multi-core and mixed workloads, Intel for Cinebench-style single-thread rendering where its 39.7% R23 advantage could matter.