AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the dominant performer in this comparison, winning 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. Its average benchmark score of 77740 places it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H averages 41215, landing in the 87th percentile. The AMD part sits within 1.7% of the Intel Core i9-14900K in average score, while the Intel part matches the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 almost exactly, with a 0% delta between them.

For workloads that scale with thread count, memory bandwidth, or cache capacity, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the clear choice. Its 16 cores with 32 threads versus the Intel's 16 cores with 16 threads means the AMD part processes two threads per core, which explains its massive leads in multi-threaded tests. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins only one benchmark, passmark find prime numbers, by a modest 7.3% margin.

For users prioritizing single-thread performance, the two processors are nearly identical. The AMD part leads by 4.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core and by just 0.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core, with a 1.8% lead in Passmark single-thread tests. The Intel part has a lower 25 W TDP versus the AMD's 55 W, which makes it the better option for thermally constrained thin-and-light designs, though the data shows a substantial performance cost for that efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins decisively in all multi-threaded productivity scenarios. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 35314 against 18395 for the Intel part, a 92% advantage. The Passmark integer math test shows the largest gap at 141.4%, with the AMD scoring 200665 versus 83111. Data compression also favors the AMD heavily, with a 105.4% lead (690650 versus 336177), indicating strong performance in archiving, database, and file-transfer workloads.

The AMD part also leads in floating-point math by 24.8% (128682 versus 103128), which benefits scientific computing, rendering, and simulation tasks. Extended instruction workloads show a 102% advantage (56346 versus 27898), meaning the AMD processor handles AVX and other vectorized code substantially better. The Passmark multithread score reflects a 61.7% lead (54934 versus 33978), while random string sorting favors the AMD by 85.8% (76177 versus 40990).

The single Intel win comes in the prime number search test, where the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 327 against the AMD's 303, a 7.3% advantage. This suggests the Intel part has a slight edge in integer-heavy, latency-sensitive workloads that do not scale with additional threads. The Intel part also shows a narrower gap in single-core tests, trailing by only 4.3% in Cinebench R15 and 0.2% in Cinebench R23, indicating that its single-thread efficiency is competitive despite the lower TDP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the Strix Halo codename. It features a dual-die design with each die measuring 70.6 mm², totaling 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses the Panther Lake architecture on Intel's 3 nm process, with the Panther Lake-H generation. The process node difference gives Intel a slight density advantage, but the AMD part compensates with a larger cache hierarchy.

The AMD processor has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The 64 MB L3 on the AMD side is more than 3.5 times larger, which explains its substantial leads in data compression and random string sorting, workloads that benefit from large working sets residing in cache.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s. The AMD's memory bandwidth is more than double, a critical factor for integrated graphics performance and memory-intensive compute tasks. The AMD also supports ECC memory, which the Intel does not.

Connectivity also diverges. The AMD uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel uses PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The Intel's newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the AMD provides more total lanes for expansion. The AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, the Intel uses Intel BGA 2540, and both are locked processors with no unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is substantially ahead. It leads by 78.8% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 92% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 61.7% in Passmark multithread. The AMD has 32 threads versus 16 on the Intel part, which drives the large margins.

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

A: They are closely matched. The AMD leads by 4.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core (316 versus 303), 0.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core (2044 versus 2040), and 1.8% in Passmark single-thread (4147 versus 4072). The Intel part has a higher boost clock, but the AMD's higher base clock compensates in sustained workloads.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the Passmark find prime numbers test with a score of 327 against the AMD's 303, a 7.3% advantage. This indicates a slight edge in specific integer operations that do not scale with thread count.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 provides 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H provides 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The AMD's bandwidth is more than double, which supports its integrated Radeon 8060S graphics and large shared cache.

Q: Which processor has the larger cache?

A: The AMD has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel has 18 MB. The AMD also has 1 MB of L2 per core versus 2.5 MB per core on the Intel, but the Intel's higher per-core L2 does not compensate for the large L3 deficit.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has a 25 W TDP. The Intel part uses less than half the power budget, which makes it more suitable for compact laptops, but the performance data shows the AMD delivers far higher throughput per watt in multi-threaded workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive AMD victory comes in Passmark integer math, where it scores 200665 versus 83111, a 141.4% lead. This benchmark reflects general integer arithmetic operations used across compilers, financial modeling, and logic-heavy applications. The magnitude of this gap indicates the AMD's 32 threads provide near-linear scaling in this workload.

Data compression shows a 105.4% advantage (690650 versus 336177). This test benefits from both large cache and high memory bandwidth, and the AMD's 64 MB L3 plus 256 GB/s bandwidth delivers over twice the throughput. The extended instructions test follows with a 102% lead (56346 versus 27898), confirming that AVX-class vector workloads run dramatically better on the AMD part.

Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 92% gap (35314 versus 18395), a standard rendering workload that scales well with core count and threads. The AMD's 32 threads versus 16 explains most of this margin. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 78.8% lead (5463 versus 3055), which is slightly lower than R23, suggesting the older benchmark is less sensitive to thread scaling.

Random string sorting favors the AMD by 85.8% (76177 versus 40990). This workload stresses memory access patterns and cache behavior, where the AMD's larger L3 and higher bandwidth provide a clear edge. Passmark multithread shows a 61.7% lead (54934 versus 33978), while data encryption shows 34.6% (35455 versus 26345), indicating the AMD's cryptographic throughput is meaningfully higher.

Floating-point math shows a more moderate 24.8% lead (128682 versus 103128). This workload relies on sustained FPU throughput, and while the AMD still wins, the margin is smaller than integer tests. Physics simulation shows a 20.2% advantage (3481 versus 2895), likely reflecting the AMD's higher thread count in physics calculations.

Single-core results are close across the board. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 4.3% lead (316 versus 303), Cinebench R23 single-core shows just 0.2% (2044 versus 2040), and Passmark single-thread shows 1.8% (4147 versus 4072). The Intel part's 4.70 GHz boost clock nearly matches the AMD's 5.10 GHz, making single-thread performance nearly equivalent.

The only Intel win is Passmark find prime numbers at 327 versus 303, a 7.3% margin. Prime number searching involves tight loops with minimal memory traffic, and the Intel's higher per-core L2 cache of 2.5 MB likely helps this specific pattern. This is the single data point where the Intel architecture shows an advantage.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The AMD has a higher base clock by 1.10 GHz, which contributes to its sustained multi-threaded performance, while the Intel's lower base clock keeps power consumption down.

Both processors have 16 cores, but the AMD has 32 threads versus 16 threads on the Intel. This is the most consequential specification difference, as it doubles the AMD's parallel execution capacity. The AMD's TDP is 55 W versus 25 W on the Intel, reflecting the higher power envelope required for those extra threads and higher clocks.

Cache configurations differ per core: the AMD has 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, while the Intel has 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core. The Intel's per-core cache is larger, but the AMD's shared L3 of 64 MB versus 18 MB reverses the overall cache advantage. Memory support differs with the AMD using only LPDDR5X and the Intel supporting both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The AMD uses a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth; the Intel uses dual-channel with 115.2 GB/s.

The AMD supports ECC memory, the Intel does not. The AMD uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, the Intel uses PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The AMD's integrated graphics is Radeon 8060S, while the Intel uses Xe3 Graphics. The AMD is built on TSMC's 4 nm process, the Intel on its own 3 nm process. The AMD was released on 2025-01-05, the Intel on 2026-01-04, making the Intel a later release. Both are mobile-segment, active-production, locked processors.