AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 388H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results show a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395, which wins 11 of the 15 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The average benchmark score of 77740 places the AMD part at the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H records an average of 44466, putting it at the 88th percentile. The AMD processor sits 74.8% higher in average score, a gap that aligns with its nearest rival comparisons: the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 trails the Intel Core i9-14900K by only 1.7% while leading the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX by 2.0%, whereas the Intel part is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (-0.2%) and the Intel Core i9-13950HX (+0.3%).

The largest single victory for AMD comes in PassMark integer math, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 200665 against 90882 for the Intel part, a 120.8% advantage. This result reflects the AMD processor's 16 cores and 32 threads, which allow it to dispatch integer workloads at more than double the throughput of the 16-core, 16-thread Intel chip. Similarly dominant results appear in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where AMD scores 35314 versus 18911, a 86.7% lead, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the margin is 84.9% (5463 versus 2955). The PassMark extended instructions test shows an 88.2% gap (56346 versus 29943), and data compression favors AMD by 90.9% (690650 versus 361763). These figures indicate that the AMD part's simultaneous multithreading and larger shared L3 cache translate into substantial throughput advantages across encoding, compression, and compute-heavy workloads.

The AMD processor also wins in memory-sensitive and floating-point tasks, though by smaller margins. PassMark floating point math shows a 14.3% advantage (128682 versus 112550), and PassMark multithread shows a 49.2% lead (54934 versus 36811). The data encryption test favors AMD by 24.4% (35455 versus 28490), and random string sorting by 73.1% (76177 versus 44010). The physics test is the closest of AMD's wins, just 7.9% ahead (3481 versus 3226).

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H claims four wins, all in single-threaded or lightly threaded tests. The most notable is Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel scores 2200.5 versus 2044 for AMD, a 7.1% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows Intel ahead by 3.1% (4280 versus 4147), and the same margin appears in the duplicate PassMark singlethread record. The largest Intel win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 358 against 303, a 15.4% edge. Cinebench R15 single-core goes to AMD by a narrow 2.1% (316 versus 309.5), meaning Intel's single-thread dominance is not universal across all tests. The pattern suggests Intel's Panther Lake architecture delivers higher per-core performance in certain integer-heavy single-thread workloads, but the AMD part remains competitive in the R15 single-core test and wins the overall single-thread comparison only in that specific case.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct usage profiles. For multi-threaded workloads, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the clear choice. Its 32 threads, 64 MB shared L3 cache, and quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth deliver leads of 86.7% in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 120.8% in integer math over the Intel part. The AMD processor's 55 W TDP is higher than the Intel part's 25 W, but the performance per thread in multi-core scenarios justifies that power envelope for compute-heavy tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the better option for single-threaded responsiveness. Its 7.1% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 15.4% advantage in prime number finding show that its Panther Lake cores, built on a 3 nm Intel process, execute lightly threaded code more efficiently. The Intel part also has a lower 25 W TDP, which makes it suited for thin-and-light mobile systems where thermal headroom is limited. The Intel chip's average score of 44466 places it just 0.3% above the Intel Core i9-13950HX, while the AMD part's 77740 average sits 1.6% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX, indicating that the AMD chip competes in a higher performance tier overall.

Users who run rendering, data compression, encryption, or large-scale integer workloads should select the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395. Users who prioritize single-thread latency and lower power draw, such as in interactive applications or battery-sensitive notebooks, will find the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H more appropriate, based strictly on the recorded benchmark scores.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average benchmark score of 77740, compared to 44466 for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H.

Q: In which test does the Intel processor beat the AMD processor by the largest margin?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H wins PassMark find prime numbers by 15.4%, scoring 358 versus 303 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395.

Q: How large is the AMD processor's advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 35314 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 86.7% higher than the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H's 18911.

Q: Does the Intel processor win any single-threaded tests?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 7.1% (2200.5 versus 2044) and PassMark single-thread by 3.1% (4280 versus 4147). The AMD processor wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 2.1%.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H supports dual-channel LPDDR5X with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 ranks at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H ranks at the 88th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD base clock is 3.00 GHz versus 2.10 GHz for Intel, though both boost to 5.10 GHz. The AMD TDP is 55 W, compared to 25 W for Intel. The AMD socket is AMD Socket FP11, while Intel uses Intel BGA 2540. The AMD process node is 4 nm from TSMC, while Intel uses a 3 nm node from its own foundry. The AMD die size is 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel's die size is not recorded in the database.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD L1 cache is 80 KB per core, with 1 MB L2 per core and 64 MB shared L3. The Intel L1 cache is 192 KB per core, with 3 MB L2 per core and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is LPDDR5X for both, but AMD uses quad-channel with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC memory, while Intel uses dual-channel with 153.6 GB/s and no ECC support. PCIe capability differs as well: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S for AMD and Arc B390 for Intel. The AMD part number is 100-000001099, and the Intel part number is SA4QWQ9EK. The AMD release date is 2025-01-05, while Intel's is 2026-01-04. Both processors are active in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, belonging to the Ryzen AI Max generation. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H uses the Panther Lake architecture under the Panther Lake codename, belonging to the Ultra X9 generation. AMD builds its chip on a 4 nm TSMC process, while Intel uses a 3 nm process at its own foundry. The AMD die consists of 2x 70.6 mm² chiplets, whereas Intel's die size is not recorded.

The core designs differ in cache allocation. AMD provides 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with a large 64 MB shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. This arrangement gives AMD a far larger aggregate cache pool for multi-threaded data sharing, while Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 support its single-thread performance strengths. The AMD processor's 32 threads, enabled by simultaneous multithreading, double the thread count of the Intel part, which explains the large multi-core benchmark gaps.

Memory architecture also diverges. AMD's quad-channel LPDDR5X controller delivers 256.0 GB/s, exactly 66.7% more bandwidth than Intel's dual-channel 153.6 GB/s. AMD also supports ECC memory, which Intel does not. The PCIe implementation differs: AMD runs Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel runs Gen 5 with 4 lanes, giving Intel a newer standard but far fewer CPU-attached lanes. The integrated graphics differ in design, with AMD shipping the Radeon 8060S and Intel the Arc B390. Both processors are unlocked in terms of multiplier, but the recorded data shows neither is unlocked, so overclocking is not supported according to the database. The Intel part's lower 25 W TDP relative to AMD's 55 W indicates a more power-efficient design, consistent with its smaller process node and lower thread count.