AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear split between the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H. Intel wins eight of the eleven comparable tests, while AMD claims three. The margins vary widely, from nearly negligible to dominant.

The largest win for AMD appears in integer math. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 scores 79,789, while the Core Ultra 5 338H manages 64,934. That is a 22.9% advantage for AMD, and it is the biggest single-test margin in either direction outside of a few Intel wins. Data compression also favors AMD, with the Ryzen part scoring 293,595 against 276,539, a 6.2% lead. Extended instructions go to AMD as well, though narrowly: 24,333 versus 23,906, a 1.8% edge.

Intel responds with a series of strong results. The most lopsided is the prime number test, where the Core Ultra 5 338H scores 304 against just 75 for the AMD chip, a 75.3% gap. Physics simulation follows, with Intel at 2,697 versus 1,120, a 58.5% difference. Floating point math also goes decisively to Intel: 84,067 against 53,084, a 36.9% lead. Data encryption shows Intel ahead by 32.1%, scoring 21,367 versus 14,502. Multithread performance favors Intel by 15.6%, with 28,717 versus 24,244. Random string sorting goes to Intel by 8.6%, and single-thread performance is close but still an Intel win, 4,180 versus 3,995, a 4.4% margin.

The overall picture is one of complementary strengths. AMD delivers higher integer throughput and compression work, while Intel dominates floating point, encryption, physics, and prime number calculations. The single-thread advantage for Intel is modest, but it shows up consistently across the two recorded single-thread entries. The multithread result is notable because the AMD part has higher average benchmark scores overall, yet Intel still outpaces it in that specific workload.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, under the Strix Halo codename. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry. Both are mobile parts, but their internal layouts differ substantially.

Core counts are a major divergence. The AMD chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel chip has 12 cores and 12 threads. That means the Intel part uses a larger number of physical cores without hyperthreading-style thread duplication, while AMD relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads from 6 cores. The recorded benchmarks suggest this structural difference matters: Intel wins multithread performance despite having no thread advantage beyond its physical core count.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel part has a much lower base clock of 1.90 GHz, with a boost of 4.70 GHz. Despite the lower base and boost figures, Intel still wins several throughput-heavy tests, which points to architectural efficiency rather than raw frequency.

Cache layouts are different as well. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has larger per-core caches and a larger L3 pool, which likely contributes to its single-thread and floating point advantages.

Memory support is similar in type, both using LPDDR5X, and both use a dual-channel memory bus. The bandwidth numbers differ slightly: AMD lists 128.0 GB/s, while Intel lists 136.5 GB/s. Intel also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes, while AMD uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. ECC memory support is present on the AMD part but absent on the Intel part.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses a Radeon 8040S, while Intel uses Arc B370. The benchmark data does not include graphics tests, so no direct performance comparison is possible from the recorded numbers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 has an average benchmark score of 48,171, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an average score of 33,989, placing it in the 84th percentile.

Q: How does the Intel part compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H sits within 0.7% of its nearest rivals. It is 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800HX, 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6353P, and 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 4244P.

Q: How does the AMD part compare to its closest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 sits within 0.5% of its nearest rivals. It is 0.1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A, 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX, 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 3900, and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D.

Q: What is the release date for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 has a release date of January 5, 2025. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a release date of January 4, 2026.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H does not.

Q: What are the power ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a TDP of 25 watts.

The Verdict

The data indicates two different usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 is the stronger all-round performer in terms of average benchmark score, sitting at 48,171 versus 33,989 for Intel. That places AMD in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 84th percentile for Intel. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock, reaching 4.90 GHz against 4.70 GHz, and it offers ECC memory support, which matters for certain workstation and reliability-focused workloads.

However, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins the majority of head-to-head tests. Its victories in floating point math, physics, encryption, and prime number calculations show a processor that excels in numerically intensive tasks. The multithread win for Intel is also significant, given that it comes from a 12-core, 12-thread design with no SMT, whereas AMD reaches 12 threads through 6 cores with simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part also draws less power, with a 25-watt TDP versus 55 watts for AMD.

For a user prioritizing raw throughput in mixed workloads, the AMD part has the higher overall score and better percentile standing. For workloads that lean on floating point, physics, encryption, or prime number computation, the Intel part is the better fit. The single-thread advantage is small but consistent, favoring Intel in both single-thread entries. The choice depends entirely on which benchmark categories reflect the intended workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 | Intel Core Ultra 5 338H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 4.70 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) |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 4 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8040S | Arc B370 |

| Release Date | January 5, 2025 | January 4, 2026 |

| Part Number | 100-000001425 | SA4REQ9EW |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 wins in integer math by 22.9%, in data compression by 6.2%, and in extended instructions by 1.8%. These are compute workloads that benefit from high per-core throughput and efficient instruction handling. The higher base clock of 3.60 GHz likely plays a role in these results. The AMD part also has the higher average benchmark score, 48,171 versus 33,989, and a stronger percentile position at 90 versus 84.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in eight of the eleven recorded tests. Its strongest areas are prime number finding, where it leads by 75.3%, physics simulation by 58.5%, floating point math by 36.9%, and data encryption by 32.1%. These are workloads that rely on dense floating point pipelines and large per-core caches. The Intel part also wins multithread performance by 15.6%, random string sorting by 8.6%, and single-thread performance by 4.4%. The lower TDP of 25 watts means this performance comes at a lower power envelope.

The practical split is clear. For integer-heavy code, compression tasks, and general mixed workloads, the AMD part holds the edge. For floating point, encryption, physics, and single-thread responsiveness, the Intel part is the better choice. The AMD part is the higher-scoring processor overall and sits in a higher performance percentile, but the Intel part wins more individual tests and does so with a 30-watt lower TDP. The database records 3 wins for AMD and 8 wins for Intel across the head-to-head set, which gives a direct count of where each processor dominates.