AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus produces 15 recorded benchmark results, with Intel taking 9 wins and AMD taking 6. The largest single margin belongs to AMD in integer math, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 200665 against Intel's 122449, a 63.9% advantage. This is the clearest separation in the entire dataset, indicating that AMD's architecture handles integer-heavy workloads with substantial efficiency gains over Intel's design.

AMD also dominates in extended instructions, scoring 56346 versus Intel's 39283, a 43.4% lead. Data compression shows a 40% advantage for AMD, with scores of 690650 and 493179 respectively. These three workloads all involve heavy data manipulation and instruction-level parallelism, which aligns with AMD's 16-core, 32-thread configuration versus Intel's 20-core, 20-thread layout. The multithread score of 54934 for AMD versus 48270 for Intel, a 13.8% lead, confirms that AMD's simultaneous multithreading delivers tangible benefits in aggregate workloads. Random string sorting also favors AMD at 76177 versus 60020, a 26.9% margin.

Intel's wins are concentrated in single-core and lightly threaded tasks. The most dramatic difference appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel scores 5917 against AMD's 2044, a 65.5% advantage. This is a massive gap, far larger than any other single-core discrepancy in the dataset. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a similar pattern, with Intel at 596 and AMD at 316, a 47% difference. These results indicate that Intel's architecture, despite having fewer threads, delivers much higher performance per thread in rendering workloads.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel reverses the expected outcome, scoring 41913 versus AMD's 35314, a 15.7% lead. This is notable because AMD wins the PassMark multithread test but loses the Cinebench multi-core test, suggesting that the two processors respond differently to specific rendering engines. Cinebench R15 multi-core, however, goes to AMD at 5463 versus 4224, a 29.3% lead. The discrepancy between the two Cinebench versions indicates that the older R15 test favors AMD's threading model, while the newer R23 test favors Intel's higher per-core throughput.

Intel also wins floating point math with 163567 versus 128682, a 21.3% advantage. Physics scores go to Intel at 3843 versus 3481, a 9.4% lead. Prime number finding shows Intel ahead at 482 versus 303, a 37.1% margin. Data encryption slightly favors Intel at 37813 versus 35455, a 6.2% difference. Single-thread PassMark goes to Intel at 4764 versus 4147, a 13% lead, consistent with the Cinebench single-core results.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average benchmark score of 77740, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has an average score of 61834, placing it in the 93rd percentile. AMD's average is approximately 25.7% higher than Intel's.

Q: How does the AMD processor compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 sits 1.6% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P, and 2% above the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX. It trails the Intel Core i9-14900K by 1.7%, making the i9-14900K its closest competitor from Intel.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for the Intel processor?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is essentially tied with the Intel Core i9-13900KF at 0% delta, and sits 0.1% above the Core i9-13900K, 0.2% above the Core i9-13900T, and 0.8% above the Intel Xeon 636.

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus consistently wins in single-thread tests. It leads by 47% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 65.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 13% in PassMark single-thread. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz on Intel versus 5.10 GHz on AMD partially explains this advantage.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Results are mixed. AMD wins PassMark multithread by 13.8% and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 29.3%, but Intel wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 15.7%. AMD also leads in data compression, integer math, extended instructions, and random string sorting, while Intel leads in floating point math and physics.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 was released on January 5, 2025. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus was released on March 16, 2026, making it roughly 14 months newer.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the codename Strix Halo, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², indicating a chiplet-based design. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, built on a 3 nm process also at TSMC. Intel's die size is 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, a substantially larger monolithic implementation.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 30 MB of shared L3. AMD's larger L3 allocation supports its high-bandwidth memory architecture, while Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches feed its higher single-thread performance.

Memory support diverges completely. AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. Intel uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s, and it does not support ECC. The bandwidth difference is substantial: AMD has 2.5 times the memory bandwidth of Intel, which directly supports AMD's wins in data-intensive workloads like compression and integer math.

PCIe connectivity also differs. AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the CPU, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The newer PCIe standard and additional lanes give Intel an advantage for external device connectivity, though this does not appear in the benchmark data. Both processors target the mobile segment, with AMD using Socket FP11 and Intel using BGA 2114.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD pairs the CPU with a Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Neither graphics solution has dedicated benchmark scores in the recorded data, so their relative performance is not quantified here.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts establish the primary structural difference. AMD has 16 cores and 32 threads, while Intel has 20 cores and 20 threads. Intel's higher core count does not translate to a thread advantage because it lacks simultaneous multithreading. Base clocks differ, with AMD at 3.00 GHz and Intel at 2.40 GHz, but boost clocks reverse the order, with Intel at 5.30 GHz and AMD at 5.10 GHz.

Both processors share a 55 W TDP, making their thermal design power identical. The process nodes differ: AMD at 4 nm and Intel at 3 nm, both from TSMC. The transistor count is listed for Intel at 17,800 million but not specified for AMD. Die sizes are 2x 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 243 mm² for Intel.

Memory channels differ, with AMD at quad-channel and Intel at dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s for AMD versus 102.4 GB/s for Intel. ECC support is present on AMD but absent on Intel. PCIe generation and lane counts differ, with AMD at Gen 4 with 16 lanes and Intel at Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The multiplier unlock status differs: AMD is locked, while Intel is unlocked. Release dates are January 5, 2025 for AMD and March 16, 2026 for Intel. Part numbers are 100-000001099 for AMD and SADST for Intel. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

AMD's wins are concentrated in data processing and parallel throughput. The 63.9% lead in integer math makes it the stronger choice for computational tasks that rely on integer operations, such as database processing, financial modeling, and general application logic. The 43.4% lead in extended instructions indicates superior support for advanced instruction sets, benefiting cryptography, media processing, and scientific computing. Data compression at 40% ahead favors AMD for archiving, backup, and storage workloads. The 13.8% multithread lead and 26.9% random string sorting advantage reinforce AMD's position for heavily parallel, memory-bandwidth-hungry applications.

Intel's wins are defined by single-thread efficiency and specific floating-point operations. The 65.5% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the largest margin in the entire comparison, making Intel the clear choice for tasks that depend on per-core speed, such as older legacy software, lightly threaded design tools, and many games that scale poorly beyond a few cores. The 21.3% lead in floating point math favors Intel for workloads like scientific simulation, 3D rendering, and audio processing. The 37.1% lead in prime number finding indicates stronger algorithmic throughput in certain mathematical operations. Intel's Cinebench R23 multi-core win, despite having fewer threads, shows that its per-core efficiency can overcome AMD's thread count advantage in some rendering engines.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two distinct design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses fewer cores with simultaneous multithreading, a quad-channel LPDDR5X memory bus, and a 64 MB L3 cache to deliver 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This configuration produces decisive wins in integer math, data compression, extended instructions, and overall multithread throughput. The 95th percentile ranking and average score of 77740 place it among the top CPUs in the database, competitive even with desktop parts like the Intel Core i9-14900K from which it trails by only 1.7%.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses more cores without hyperthreading, a 3 nm process, and much larger per-core L1 and L2 caches. Its single-core performance is exceptional, with a 65.5% lead over AMD in Cinebench R23 single-core. The 5.30 GHz boost clock and 30 MB of shared L3 cache support this advantage. Intel wins 9 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, but its average score of 61834 places it in the 93rd percentile, closely matched with the Core i9-13900K family.

For workloads dominated by parallel integer processing, memory bandwidth, and data manipulation, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 delivers superior results. For single-threaded applications, floating-point math, and specific rendering workloads like Cinebench R23, the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the stronger performer. The choice depends on whether the workload prioritizes AMD's 63.9% integer math advantage or Intel's 65.5% single-core rendering advantage. The data does not support a universal winner, only a clear division of strengths.