AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split decision between the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, with the AMD part taking 10 benchmark wins and the Intel part taking 7. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

In the Cinebench suite, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 leads every single test, but by a very narrow margin. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multicore and singlecore variants, the AMD chip wins by exactly 0.7%. For example, in Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD scores 28424 against 28221 for the Intel, while in singlecore it is 4012 versus 3984. These are effectively identical scores, indicating that the two processors deliver nearly the same rendering throughput in these workloads.

The larger divergences appear in the PassMark suite. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 shows decisive advantages in several CPU-centric tests. In data compression, it scores 379448 against 312927 for the Intel part, a 21.3% lead. Extended instructions show a 22.5% advantage with scores of 31442 versus 25669. Integer math favors AMD by 19.3% (105056 versus 88083), and random string sorting goes to AMD by 7.1% (40784 versus 38093).

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H counters with equally large wins in other areas. The most dramatic is the find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 321 versus 157 for AMD, a 51.1% advantage. Floating point math also goes strongly to Intel, with 105681 versus 69580, a 34.2% lead. Physics simulation favors Intel by 40.1% (2857 versus 1711), and data encryption shows a 24.8% Intel advantage (25228 versus 18978). The PassMark multithread test goes to Intel by 2.7% (32956 versus 32075), while the single thread tests are essentially tied, with Intel leading by only 0.2% (4005 versus 3995).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 dominates in integer-heavy and data manipulation workloads. Its 21.3% lead in data compression and 19.3% lead in integer math suggest that file archiving, database operations, and general productivity tasks that rely on integer processing will run noticeably faster on this chip. The 22.5% advantage in extended instructions also points to strong performance in workloads using advanced CPU instruction sets, which often appear in encryption, media encoding, and scientific calculations.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H takes the lead in floating point and physics calculations. The 34.2% margin in floating point math makes it the better choice for simulation, 3D rendering, and scientific computing that depends heavily on FPU throughput. The 40.1% physics advantage reinforces this, as physics engines in games and engineering software rely on floating point operations. The 51.1% lead in prime number calculation is notable for cryptographic and number-theoretic workloads, while the 24.8% encryption advantage means the Intel part handles AES and other cryptographic tasks more efficiently.

The multithread benchmark, which often reflects overall parallel workload performance, slightly favors Intel at 32956 versus 32075. However, the Cinebench multicore results, which are also parallel workloads, slightly favor AMD. This suggests that the two chips trade blows depending on the specific instruction mix, rather than one being universally faster in threaded tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average benchmark score of 43326, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H averages 40518. The AMD part also ranks at the 88th percentile among all CPUs, versus the 87th percentile for Intel.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 28424, and the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28221. AMD leads by 0.7%, a margin that is effectively within measurement noise.

Q: Which chip is faster in data encryption?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is faster, scoring 25228 versus 18978 for AMD, a 24.8% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in the find prime numbers test?

A: Intel wins decisively with 321 versus 157, a 51.1% lead.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: How close is the single-thread performance?

A: The PassMark single thread test shows Intel at 4005 and AMD at 3995, a 0.2% difference. The Cinebench R23 singlecore test shows AMD at 4012 and Intel at 3984, a 0.7% difference. The two are effectively tied in single-thread performance.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ significantly in core configuration. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Intel part has double the core count but no hyperthreading, while the AMD part relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 16 threads.

Base clocks differ substantially. The AMD chip runs at 3.60 GHz base, while the Intel chip runs at 2.00 GHz base. Both boost to 5.00 GHz. The thermal design power also diverges: AMD is rated at 55 W, Intel at 25 W. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, while Intel uses Intel BGA 2540.

Memory configuration differs as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses a quad-channel LPDDR5X memory bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses dual-channel LPDDR5X with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth and does not support ECC. PCIe support also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes.

The integrated graphics are different: AMD uses the Radeon 8050S, Intel uses the Arc B390. Release dates are roughly a year apart, with AMD launching on 2025-01-05 and Intel on 2026-01-04.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Halo, fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses the Panther Lake architecture, also codenamed Panther Lake, fabricated on a 3 nm process by Intel.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip therefore has much more total L3, while Intel has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations.

The Intel chip belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, specifically the Ultra X7 Panther Lake-H family. The AMD chip belongs to the Ryzen AI Max PRO Zen 5 generation. Both are locked multipliers, so neither supports overclocking. The AMD part is marked for the mobile segment, as is the Intel part, and both are currently in active production.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the stronger overall processor, with a higher average benchmark score of 43326 versus 40518 and a higher percentile ranking at 88 versus 87. Its wins in data compression, integer math, and extended instructions make it the better choice for general productivity, database work, and applications that process large amounts of integer data.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, despite having half the L3 cache and a much lower TDP of 25 W versus 55 W, delivers superior floating point performance, physics simulation, and encryption. For workloads specifically involving FPU-heavy calculations, cryptographic operations, or physics engines, the Intel part holds clear advantages that range from 24.8% to 51.1%.

For a laptop buyer who runs mixed workloads, the AMD chip offers a more balanced profile with wins in more benchmark categories. For a user whose primary tasks involve scientific computing, 3D simulation, or encryption, the Intel part is the data-backed choice. The Cinebench results show that the two are nearly identical in rendering workloads, so the decision should rest on the specific application mix rather than general expectations. The higher core count of the Intel part does not translate into a win in Cinebench multicore, where AMD still leads by 0.7%, but it does help in the PassMark multithread test where Intel leads by 2.7%. Overall, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the safer general-purpose pick, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is the specialized choice for floating point and encryption tasks.