AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the definitive winner in almost every measurable workload category. The recorded data shows it claims 15 benchmark wins out of 17 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 7 350 takes only 2 wins, both in the PassMark single-thread metric, where it edges ahead by a small margin of 2.6%. The AMD part also holds a significantly higher overall performance percentile at 88 versus Intel's 71, and its average benchmark score of 43326 dwarfs the Intel's 17779. For anyone running multi-threaded applications, content creation, or compute-heavy tasks, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the only rational choice based on the data.

The Intel Core 7 350 does secure a narrow victory in PassMark single-thread performance (4100 vs 3995), which indicates it can hold its own in lightly threaded, responsiveness-focused tasks. However, this single advantage does not compensate for the massive deficits in every other category. The Intel part sits closer to different rivals in its own performance tier, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (delta of -0.6%) and the Intel Core 5 120U (delta of -0.7%), whereas the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 trades blows with much faster chips like the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (delta of -0.2%) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (delta of 0.3%). The verdict is clear: choose the AMD for performance, and only consider the Intel if the single-thread PassMark score is the absolute priority.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on Intel's own 3 nm process. The AMD chip is a high-performance part with 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel chip has only 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading entirely. This fundamental thread-count difference explains much of the multi-threaded benchmark gap.

Cache configurations also differ sharply. The AMD processor allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a 32 MB shared L3 pool. The Intel processor gives each core 192 KB of L1 and 2.5 MB of L2, but only 6 MB of shared L3. Despite having larger per-core L1 and L2, the Intel part's tiny L3 cache hurts in workloads that benefit from a large shared cache. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. Memory support diverges as well: AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with just 59.7 GB/s. The PCIe interface also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel provides Gen 4 with only 6 lanes.

The integrated graphics are different too. AMD packs the Radeon 8050S, while Intel includes Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost of 5.00 GHz with a 55 W TDP. The Intel part runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost, with a much lower 15 W TDP. The AMD processor uses the AMD Socket FP11, and the Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The multi-threaded Cinebench results show a complete rout. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 28424 against the Intel's 8030, a delta of 254%. Even in Cinebench R23 single-core, where clock speed matters most, the AMD wins with 4012 versus 2046, a 96.1% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 11938 versus 5373, a 122.2% delta, and single-core shows 1685 versus 758, a 122.3% delta. The older Cinebench R15 test confirms the pattern: multi-core 2865 versus 1220 (134.8% delta) and single-core 404 versus 292 (38.4% delta).

PassMark results follow the same trend. Integer math shows the AMD at 105056 versus the Intel's 33734, a 211.4% lead. Data compression favors AMD with 379448 versus 143123, a 165.1% delta. Extended instructions score 31442 versus 12045, a 161% delta. Random string sorting goes to AMD at 40784 versus 17238, a 136.6% delta. Multithread performance shows 32075 versus 15170, a 111.4% delta. Data encryption is less one-sided but still a clear AMD win: 18978 versus 10933, a 73.6% delta. Floating point math shows 69580 versus 42809, a 62.5% delta. Find prime numbers gives AMD 157 versus 107, a 46.7% delta. Physics tests show 1711 versus 1173, a 45.9% delta.

The only Intel wins come in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4100 against the AMD's 3995. The delta is only 2.6% in Intel's favor. This result appears twice in the database (listed as passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread), but it is a narrow margin. Across all other recorded tests, the AMD part leads by margins ranging from 38.4% to 254%. The overall benchmark average confirms the gap: the AMD part averages 43326 points, while the Intel part averages 17779 points.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. Core count: AMD has 8 cores, Intel has 6. Thread count: AMD has 16 threads, Intel has 6. Base clock: AMD runs at 3.60 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clock: AMD reaches 5.00 GHz, Intel reaches 4.80 GHz. TDP: AMD is rated at 55 W, Intel at 15 W. Socket: AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. Process node: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm from Intel. Codename: AMD is Strix Halo, Intel is Wildcat Lake. Architecture name: AMD uses Zen 5, Intel's architecture field is not populated.

Cache differs per core and total. AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, Intel has 192 KB L1 per core. AMD has 1 MB L2 per core, Intel has 2.5 MB L2 per core. AMD has 32 MB shared L3, Intel has 6 MB shared L3. Memory support: AMD uses LPDDR5X only, Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bus: AMD is quad-channel, Intel is single-channel. Memory bandwidth: AMD provides 256.0 GB/s, Intel provides 59.7 GB/s. ECC support: AMD supports ECC, Intel does not. PCIe lanes: AMD has 16 lanes at Gen 4, Intel has 6 lanes at Gen 4. Integrated graphics: AMD uses Radeon 8050S, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). Release date: AMD was released on 2025-01-05, Intel on 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $469. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is significantly faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28424 versus the Intel Core 7 350's 8030, a 254% advantage. The PassMark multithread test shows 32075 versus 15170, a 111.4% delta.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 350 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark single-thread test with 4100 points against the AMD's 3995. The margin is 2.6%. This result appears twice in the database, but it is the only recorded Intel victory.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The AMD part uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s. The AMD memory bandwidth is far higher, which contributes to its large leads in memory-sensitive workloads like data compression.

Q: What are the cache differences between the two?

A: The AMD processor has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB shared L3. The Intel processor has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and only 6 MB shared L3. The AMD's larger L3 cache is a notable advantage for shared data workloads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 350 does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do the integrated graphics differ?

A: The AMD part includes the Radeon 8050S, while the Intel part includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database records no direct graphics benchmarks for either, so the comparison is limited to the specification differences.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins in every multi-threaded and compute-heavy category. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration with 32 MB of L3 cache and quad-channel memory delivers dominant results in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, with deltas between 122.2% and 254%. It also wins all PassMark CPU tests except single-thread, including integer math (211.4% delta), data compression (165.1% delta), extended instructions (161% delta), random string sorting (136.6% delta), multithread (111.4% delta), encryption (73.6% delta), floating point math (62.5% delta), physics (45.9% delta), and find prime numbers (46.7% delta). The AMD part is the clear choice for rendering, compiling, scientific computing, and any workload that scales with cores, cache, and memory bandwidth.

The Intel Core 7 350 wins only the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 4100 versus 3995. This 2.6% edge suggests it can offer marginally better responsiveness in single-threaded, latency-sensitive applications. Its 15 W TDP also indicates a much lower power envelope than the AMD's 55 W, which matters in fanless or ultra-portable designs. However, the data shows this is a narrow niche. The Intel part's 6 MB L3 cache, single-channel memory, and lack of multithreading hold it back in nearly every other scenario. The Intel Core 7 350 also sits close to the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT and Intel Core 5 120U in its performance tier, which are much older or lower-tier parts, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 competes near the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 and Intel Core Ultra 9 386H. The measured performance gap is not marginal; it is a structural difference in processor capability.