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

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 28424 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core i7-14701TE scores 17035. The AMD part leads by 66.9%.

Q: What is the only benchmark where the Intel Core i7-14701TE outperforms the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385?

A: The Intel Core i7-14701TE wins the PassMark physics test, scoring 1860 versus 1711 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, a margin of 8%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 leads in PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests with a score of 3995, versus 2637 for the Intel Core i7-14701TE, a 51.5% advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for both CPUs?

A: Both processors feature 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-14701TE has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the 5.00 GHz boost clock of the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average benchmark score of 43326, while the Intel Core i7-14701TE averages 26013. The AMD part ranks in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 78th percentile for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i7-14701TE is based on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake Refresh, using a 10 nm process at Intel. The AMD part is a mobile segment processor on AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700.

Cache layouts differ between the two. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 1 MB L2 per core and 32 MB shared L3. The Intel Core i7-14701TE has a larger 2 MB L2 per core and 33 MB shared L3. The Intel die size is recorded at 257 mm².

Memory support diverges clearly. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, and no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. Both support ECC memory. PCIe capability differs as well: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics also differ. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 includes a Radeon 8050S, while the Intel Core i7-14701TE includes UHD Graphics 770. The AMD processor was released on 2025-01-05, while the Intel part was released earlier on 2024-06-30. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a dominant sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, which wins 16 of the 17 benchmark comparisons. The only exception is the PassMark physics test, where the Intel Core i7-14701TE takes a narrow win.

In Cinebench tests, the AMD part shows consistent margins. Cinebench R15 multi-core: 2865 versus 1716, a 67% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core: 404 versus 242, a 66.9% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core: 11938 versus 7154, a 66.9% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core: 1685 versus 1010, a 66.8% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 28424 versus 17035, a 66.9% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core: 4012 versus 2405, a 66.8% lead. The consistency of the delta percentages across all six Cinebench variants indicates a uniform architectural advantage in both single-thread and multi-thread workloads.

PassMark results show a wider spread of deltas. The largest margin is in extended instructions, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 31442 versus 14354 for Intel, a 119% advantage. Random string sorting shows a 79.2% lead (40784 versus 22760). Data compression favors AMD by 72.1% (379448 versus 220520). Multi-thread performance is 60% higher (32075 versus 20042). Integer math shows a 59.7% lead (105056 versus 65792). Single-thread performance is 51.5% higher (3995 versus 2637). Data encryption shows a 62.2% lead (18978 versus 11699). Floating point math is 38.6% ahead (69580 versus 50219). The smallest AMD win is in find prime numbers, only 9.8% (157 versus 143).

The Intel part's lone win in PassMark physics (1860 versus 1711, an 8% lead) suggests a specific workload characteristic where the Intel architecture retains an edge. This is the only recorded benchmark where Intel's score exceeds AMD's.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several recorded specification fields. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-14701TE has a base clock of 2.10 GHz. The boost clock favors Intel: 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. TDP differs: AMD lists 55, Intel lists 45.

Process node differs: AMD uses 4 nm, Intel uses 10 nm. The foundry is TSMC for AMD and Intel for Intel. The AMD part has no recorded die size; the Intel part is 257 mm². L2 cache per core is 1 MB for AMD and 2 MB for Intel. L3 cache is 32 MB shared for AMD and 33 MB shared for Intel. Memory support: LPDDR5X for AMD, DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. Memory bus: quad-channel for AMD, dual-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s for AMD, no recorded value for Intel. PCIe: Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD, Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon 8050S for AMD, UHD Graphics 770 for Intel. Market segment: mobile for AMD, desktop for Intel. Release date: 2025-01-05 for AMD, 2024-06-30 for Intel. Part numbers differ: 100-000001422 for AMD, Q49GSRNJL for Intel.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across nearly every measured workload. The average benchmark score of 43326 versus 26013 places the AMD part in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits in the 78th percentile. The nearest rival data confirms this positioning: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is closest to the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (delta -0.2%), the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (delta 0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 170 (delta -0.8%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 (delta -0.9%). The Intel Core i7-14701TE is closest to the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 (delta 0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 5 8640HS (delta -0.4%), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655GE (delta 0.5%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U (delta -0.7%). These rival groups show that the AMD part competes in a higher performance tier.

Users who require maximum multi-core throughput, strong single-core speed, and high memory bandwidth should select the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385. The data shows a 66.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, a 51.5% lead in PassMark single-thread, and a 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth. The Intel part offers a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz, a larger L2 cache per core, and a win in PassMark physics. It also presents a lower TDP of 45. For workloads that stress the physics simulation pattern measured by PassMark, the Intel part has a specific advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins in 16 of 17 recorded benchmarks. It dominates content creation workloads as reflected by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core variants. The 119% lead in extended instructions indicates strong SIMD and specialized instruction handling. Data compression and encryption workloads show substantial leads of 72.1% and 62.2% respectively. Integer math and floating point math both favor AMD, with leads of 59.7% and 38.6%. Random string sorting, a memory-intensive workload, shows a 79.2% advantage. The multi-thread score of 32075 versus 20042 confirms the AMD part as the stronger choice for parallel processing.

The Intel Core i7-14701TE wins in exactly one benchmark: PassMark physics, with a score of 1860 versus 1711, an 8% lead. This indicates that for workloads resembling the physics calculations in that specific test, the Intel architecture holds a measurable edge. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and the larger L2 cache of 2 MB per core may contribute to this single result. The Intel part also has a lower TDP of 45, which may be relevant for systems with tighter thermal envelopes, though the database records no power consumption measurements.

For all other use cases, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the superior performer according to the recorded data. The quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a substantial foundation for memory-heavy tasks. The 4 nm process at TSMC and the Zen 5 architecture deliver consistent wins across rendering, encoding, and general computation benchmarks. The Intel part remains a viable choice only for the specific physics workload where it records a win.