AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core i7-14701E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a decisive overall picture: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i7-14701E takes 4. The margin in many of AMD's wins is substantial. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core tests show a consistent 28.1% to 28.3% advantage for the AMD part. For instance, the AMD chip scores 28,424 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 22,195 for the Intel, and 4,012 versus 3,133 in the single-core run. This uniformity across three Cinebench generations suggests a broad architectural efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark results reinforce the pattern but also reveal where each processor excels. The AMD processor leads in data compression by 34.1% (379,448 versus 282,939), in data encryption by 27.7% (18,978 versus 14,862), and in integer math by 29.2% (105,056 versus 81,325). The largest single delta in the entire comparison is in extended instructions, where the AMD part scores 31,442 against 18,528, a 69.7% lead. Random string sorting also favors AMD by 39.9% (40,784 versus 29,158), and floating-point math shows a 12.5% edge (69,580 versus 61,873). The multi-thread PassMark score lands at 32,075 for AMD versus 26,112 for Intel, a 22.8% gap that aligns with the Cinebench multi-core deltas.

The Intel processor's wins are narrower but meaningful in specific domains. PassMark single-thread shows Intel at 4,305 versus AMD's 3,995, a 7.2% advantage. PassMark physics is a larger win for Intel: 2,399 versus 1,711, a 28.7% lead. In find prime numbers, Intel scores 176 against 157, a 10.8% edge. These three victories, plus the duplicated single-thread entry, suggest Intel retains strengths in latency-sensitive scalar work and certain integer algorithms.

A notable observation: the AMD part's average benchmark score of 43,326 places it at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part averages 33,206 at the 83rd percentile. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 170 (0.8% behind). The Intel chip's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H with a 0% delta, followed by the AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS at 0.1% behind. These proximity values indicate that the i7-14701E sits in a different competitive tier despite its wins in a few benchmarks.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for users prioritizing raw throughput across a wide range of workloads: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385. It wins the majority of tests, often by large margins, and its 88th percentile ranking versus 83rd for Intel confirms a higher standing in the overall database. The Cinebench results alone, with every test showing a 28.1% or 28.3% lead, establish AMD as the stronger rendering and multi-core compute option. The PassMark extended instructions result, a 69.7% gap, further cements this for vectorized and specialized instruction workloads.

The Intel Core i7-14701E is not without its justifications. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4,305 versus 3,995 indicates a faster baseline for lightly threaded applications. The physics test win, 2,399 versus 1,711, points to particular strengths in simulation-style physics calculations. The find prime numbers result, 176 versus 157, suggests that certain integer loop patterns run more efficiently on the Intel architecture. However, these wins are isolated to 4 tests out of 17, and the single-thread margin is only 7.2%, while AMD's multi-core wins frequently exceed 25%.

The average benchmark scores tell the same story from a holistic angle: 43,326 for AMD versus 33,206 for Intel, a difference of roughly 30% in aggregate performance. The nearest rival data for each part shows that AMD competes at a higher absolute level, with rivals averaging around 43,000 to 43,700, while Intel's rivals average around 33,000 to 33,200. The verdict from the measurements is that the AMD processor delivers superior overall performance, with the Intel part only winning in specific, narrower scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 dominates in all multi-core rendering benchmarks, all single-core Cinebench tests, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, integer math, multi-thread PassMark, random string sorting, and floating-point math. This profile suits content creation, compilation, data processing, and any workload that can utilize multiple threads or wide vector units. The 69.7% extended instructions lead indicates particular strength in AVX-style or specialized instruction workloads. The 34.1% compression advantage and 39.9% random string sorting lead suggest efficient memory handling and data throughput in file archiving and text processing tasks.

The Intel Core i7-14701E wins in PassMark single-thread, PassMark physics, and find prime numbers. The single-thread victory indicates an edge in applications that are strictly serial and latency-bound. The physics win, by a substantial 28.7%, points to advantages in physics simulation engines that may rely on specific instruction patterns or branch prediction behavior. The find prime numbers result, a 10.8% margin, suggests that simple integer loops with high branch density run faster on the Intel design. These are niche but real advantages for workloads like legacy single-threaded software, certain physics middleware, and prime-number or number-theory computations.

The division is clean: AMD for throughput and breadth, Intel for specific scalar and physics-oriented tasks. The data does not show Intel winning any memory-bandwidth-sensitive tests, any multi-threaded test, or any vectorized workload. Users whose applications match AMD's winning categories should expect large performance gains, while those with workloads matching Intel's four wins will see a more modest but measurable benefit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average benchmark score of 43,326, while the Intel Core i7-14701E averages 33,206.

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

A: The AMD chip scores 28,424 versus 22,195 for Intel, a 28.1% advantage.

Q: In which tests does the Intel Core i7-14701E outperform the AMD chip?

A: The Intel part wins PassMark single-thread (4,305 versus 3,995, a 7.2% lead), PassMark physics (2,399 versus 1,711, a 28.7% lead), and PassMark find prime numbers (176 versus 157, a 10.8% lead).

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark extended instructions, where AMD scores 31,442 against Intel's 18,528, a 69.7% difference.

Q: How do the two processors rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is at the 88th percentile, while the Intel Core i7-14701E is at the 83rd percentile.

Q: Does the Intel processor win any multi-threaded benchmark?

A: No, the Intel part does not win any multi-threaded test in the head-to-head set. Its wins are in single-thread, physics, and find prime numbers, all of which are single-thread or lightweight-thread workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, and fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i7-14701E uses Raptor Lake architecture, codenamed Raptor Lake-R, on a 10 nm process at Intel. Both have 8 cores and 16 threads, but the underlying implementations diverge significantly.

Cache hierarchies differ. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but the AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel has 2 MB per core. L3 cache is 32 MB shared on AMD versus 33 MB shared on Intel. The Intel part has a slightly larger total cache pool, but the AMD part's smaller L2 with larger aggregate bandwidth may contribute to its compression and string sorting wins.

Memory support is another major split. The AMD processor uses LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no recorded memory bandwidth in the data. The quad-channel configuration on AMD likely explains its dominance in data compression (34.1% lead) and random string sorting (39.9% lead), both of which are memory-throughput sensitive. Both processors support ECC memory.

The AMD part has a Radeon 8050S integrated GPU, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. Both are active production parts, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part was released on 2025-01-05, while the Intel part was released on 2024-06-30. The Intel part has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while no die size is recorded for the AMD part.

Specification Differences

The base clock differs substantially: the AMD part runs at 3.60 GHz, while the Intel part runs at 2.60 GHz. Boost clocks reverse the order, with Intel reaching 5.40 GHz versus 5.00 GHz for AMD. The TDP also differs, with AMD rated at 55 watts and Intel at 65 watts. The AMD part's lower TDP combined with higher base clock suggests a more power-efficient design per clock, which aligns with its 4 nm process versus Intel's 10 nm process.

PCIe support differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel part has a newer PCIe generation, but the AMD part's memory bandwidth advantage may compensate in many workloads. Memory channels differ as well: AMD uses quad-channel LPDDR5X, while Intel uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5. The market segments differ, with AMD classified as Mobile and Intel as Desktop, which explains the differing sockets and memory types.

The integrated graphics differ in name and likely capability, but the recorded data only lists the GPU names. The part numbers are distinct: 100-000001422 for AMD and Q49FSRNJK for Intel. The generation labels are "Ryzen AI Max PRO (Zen 5)" for AMD and "Core i7 (Raptor Lake Refresh)" for Intel. Neither processor has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. The Intel part is from the Core 14th Gen series, while the AMD part has no series designation. Both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads, so the core and thread counts are identical; the differences lie in clock speeds, cache sizes, memory architecture, process node, and platform integration.