AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core i7-14650HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and Intel Core i7-14650HX shows a split that is far from uniform. Intel takes 10 of the 17 recorded benchmark wins, while AMD claims 7, but the margins tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The single most dramatic result in the dataset is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 4012 against Intel's 1969, a 103.8% advantage. This is not a marginal lead; it is a doubling of performance in one of the most widely cited CPU workloads. The R23 multi-core result reinforces AMD's strength, with the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 posting 28424 versus 20454, a 39% lead. These two results alone establish that in modern Cinebench workloads, the AMD part is decisively ahead.

Cinebench R15 single-core tells a similar story, though less extreme: AMD scores 404 against Intel's 285.5, a 41.5% margin. The PassMark single-thread test also favors AMD, with 3995 versus 3841, a 4% lead. In extended instruction throughput, AMD wins by 30.2%, scoring 31442 against Intel's 24150. The prime number search test goes to AMD by a slim 3.3% (157 versus 152).

Intel's wins are concentrated in older Cinebench versions and specific PassMark workloads. The R15 multi-core test gives Intel a 3470.5 to 2865 victory, a 17.4% margin. The R20 multi-core result is essentially a tie, with Intel ahead by just 0.1% (11946 versus 11938). R20 single-core is also a near dead heat, Intel winning by 0.1% (1686 versus 1685).

In PassMark, Intel dominates several math and throughput categories. Floating-point math shows Intel at 84999 versus AMD's 69580, an 18.1% lead. Integer math goes to Intel by 9.9% (116661 versus 105056). Data encryption favors Intel by 17.2% (22917 versus 18978). Physics tests give Intel a 22.3% margin (2202 versus 1711). Data compression is a modest Intel win at 4.8% (398418 versus 379448), and random string sorting goes to Intel by 5.2% (43035 versus 40784). The PassMark multithread aggregate puts Intel ahead by 4.2% (33495 versus 32075).

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split: AMD's avgBenchmarkScore is 43326, while Intel's is 41576. Both parts sit at the 88th percentile among all CPUs in the database. AMD's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43431 (-0.2%), while Intel's nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H at 41621 (-0.1%). The data clearly shows that these two processors occupy similar overall performance tiers, but their strengths are distributed very differently across workload types.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two mobile processors is substantial. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core i7-14650HX uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-HX Refresh, on Intel's 10 nm process. It has 16 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Cache configurations differ markedly. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but AMD allocates 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core. The shared L3 cache is 32 MB on the AMD side versus 30 MB on Intel. These differences reflect the distinct design philosophies: AMD's Zen 5 favors higher per-core efficiency, while Intel's hybrid Raptor Lake design relies on a larger core count to achieve multi-threaded throughput.

Memory support is another clear divider. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 through a dual-channel bus, with no recorded bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on both platforms. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are dramatically different. AMD pairs the CPU with a Radeon 8050S GPU, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 710. The process node gap (4 nm versus 10 nm) is a key factor in explaining the AMD part's higher single-core efficiency and lower power draw for comparable performance. The Intel die size is recorded at 257 mm², while no die size is listed for AMD.

The socket and platform are entirely separate: AMD uses Socket FP11, Intel uses BGA 1964. The AMD part is not multiplier unlocked, while the Intel part is. Release dates are close, with AMD launching on 2025-01-05 and Intel on 2024-01-07. Both are listed as Active in production status and target the Mobile market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data suggests clear use-case separation. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the choice for workloads that emphasize single-core responsiveness and modern rendering engines. The 103.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the standout metric, indicating that applications relying on strong per-thread performance, such as many desktop productivity tools and lightly threaded creative software, will see a substantial advantage. The 30.2% lead in extended instructions (PassMark) further supports AMD's strength in SIMD-heavy and vectorized code paths.

The AMD part also holds a decisive edge in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with a 39% margin. This suggests that in modern multi-threaded rendering workloads that scale well across cores, the Zen 5 architecture's efficiency overcomes Intel's core-count advantage. The prime number test, while narrow at 3.3%, also favors AMD, indicating strong integer throughput in certain algorithmic patterns.

Intel's wins are concentrated in older benchmark versions and specific math operations. The R15 multi-core lead of 17.4% suggests that legacy workloads, which may not be optimized for Zen 5's newer design, still favor Intel's higher core count. The physics test (22.3% Intel lead) and floating-point math (18.1% Intel lead) point toward simulation and scientific computing scenarios that rely heavily on floating-point throughput. Data encryption (17.2% Intel lead) and data compression (4.8% Intel lead) indicate that Intel retains an edge in certain data-processing pipelines.

The PassMark multithread aggregate gives Intel a 4.2% lead, which is modest but consistent across several sub-tests. For users running a broad mix of PassMark-style workloads, Intel's 16 cores and 24 threads provide a small aggregate advantage. However, the overall average benchmark score favors AMD by about 4.2% (43326 versus 41576), driven largely by the massive Cinebench R23 single-core and multi-core wins.

In summary, choose the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 for modern rendering, single-threaded responsiveness, and extended instruction workloads. Choose the Intel Core i7-14650HX for legacy Cinebench versions, floating-point heavy simulation, and data encryption tasks, where its core count and older architecture hold an advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher Cinebench R23 single-core score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 4012, which is 103.8% higher than the Intel Core i7-14650HX's 1969.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R20 multi-core?

A: They are essentially tied. The Intel Core i7-14650HX scores 11946, just 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 11938.

Q: Which chip wins in PassMark data encryption?

A: The Intel Core i7-14650HX wins by 17.2%, scoring 22917 against the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 18978.

Q: What is the core and thread count for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i7-14650HX has 16 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor supports quad-channel memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus. The Intel Core i7-14650HX uses a dual-channel bus with DDR4 and DDR5 support.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average benchmark score of 43326, while the Intel Core i7-14650HX has 41576. Both are at the 88th percentile among all CPUs.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the recorded data.

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 | Intel Core i7-14650HX |

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

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 1964 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Raptor Lake-HX |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max PRO (Zen 5) | Core i7 (Raptor Lake-HX Refresh) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 257 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8050S | UHD Graphics 710 |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2024-01-07 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | 100-000001422 | SRMXH |