AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 vs Intel Core i9-13900KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a lopsided comparison. The Intel Core i9-13900KF wins 14 of the 15 shared benchmarks, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 takes a single victory. The scale of the Intel lead varies dramatically by workload, from narrow single-digit margins to crushing multi-core deficits.

The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel part scores 6897 against the AMD's 1976, a 71.3% advantage. That is an enormous single-threaded delta and reflects a fundamental difference in how each processor approaches peak frequency. The Cinebench R15 single-core test tells a similar story, with Intel ahead by 56.4% (695 versus 303). These results indicate that for lightly threaded tasks, such as legacy applications or responsiveness-bound workloads, the Intel processor holds a decisive edge.

Multi-core rendering also favors Intel heavily. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-13900KF posts 48855 versus 24828, a 49.2% lead. The Cinebench R15 multi-core result shows Intel ahead by 20.4% (4924 versus 3918). The smaller margin in R15 compared to R23 suggests the AMD part scales reasonably well up to a point, but the Intel processor's additional cores and higher power envelope allow it to pull further ahead in longer, more sustained rendering workloads.

The PassMark suite reveals a mixed pattern. Intel wins data compression by 35.6% (786218 versus 506170), data encryption by 43.6% (46186 versus 26027), and random string sorting by 36.1% (86510 versus 55248). These are all memory-latency and cache-sensitive operations, and the Intel part's dual-channel DDR5 configuration plus larger per-core L2 appears to provide an advantage.

Floating point math goes to Intel by 37.3% (150869 versus 94666), and integer math by 28.2% (206859 versus 148508). Extended instructions see a narrower Intel lead of 11.3% (46084 versus 40888), showing that the AMD Zen 5 architecture is competitive in specialized instruction throughput even when behind in raw scalar work.

The AMD's single win comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 323 against Intel's 225, a 43.6% advantage. This is a notable result, since prime number finding is a heavily integer-dependent, branch-heavy workload. It suggests the Zen 5 core has specific strengths in certain algorithmic patterns that do not translate to broader integer performance.

The overall multithreaded PassMark score favors Intel by 25.7% (57729 versus 42912), and physics by a modest 6.2% (2956 versus 2773). The physics result is the closest margin in the entire dataset, indicating that in some simulated physical workloads the two processors are nearly equivalent.

Single-thread PassMark shows Intel ahead by 13.5% (4584 versus 3967), a smaller gap than the Cinebench single-core tests. This discrepancy between benchmark suites matters: Cinebench R23 single-core rewards the Intel's 5.80 GHz boost clock heavily, while PassMark's single-thread workload is apparently less sensitive to peak frequency.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 sits at 63765, while the Intel Core i9-13900KF averages 61841. Despite losing nearly every head-to-head test, the AMD part actually has a higher average score across all recorded benchmarks. This is because the AMD's dataset includes far fewer tests, and its PassMark scores, while lower than Intel's in most categories, are still strong enough to lift the average. The Intel part's average is dragged down by its inclusion of additional 3DMark tests and Cinebench R20 results, which are not present in the AMD's data.

The nearest rival data places the AMD part at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with its closest competitor being the Intel Core i9-13900KS at a 0.4% difference in average score. The Intel Core i9-13900KF also sits at the 93rd percentile, with its nearest rival being the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus at a 0% delta. Both processors occupy essentially the same overall performance tier in the database, even though their head-to-head results diverge sharply.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses the Zen 5 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the Intel Core i9-13900KF uses Raptor Lake on Intel's 10 nm process. The process node difference is significant: 4 nm versus 10 nm means the AMD part packs transistors more densely, which partially explains its 55 watt TDP against Intel's 125 watts.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel part uses a hybrid design with performance and efficiency cores, which is characteristic of Raptor Lake. The AMD part uses a unified Zen 5 core layout. Despite having half the core count, the AMD part manages to stay within reasonable striking distance in some multi-threaded tests, though it ultimately loses all of them.

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core for AMD versus 2 MB per core for Intel. The shared L3 cache is where the gap reverses: AMD provides 64 MB shared, while Intel provides 36 MB shared. The AMD's larger L3 is likely a factor in its prime number win, as that workload benefits from having more data resident in cache.

Memory support diverges completely. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no recorded memory bandwidth figure. The AMD's quad-channel memory configuration is unusual for a mobile processor and provides substantial bandwidth for integrated graphics and compute tasks.

Platform connectivity differs as well. The AMD uses AMD Socket FP11 with PCIe Gen 4 and 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel uses Intel Socket 1700 with PCIe Gen 5 and 20 lanes. The Intel part has more PCIe lanes and a newer generation, which matters for desktop expansion. The AMD part compensates with an integrated Radeon 8050S GPU, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics at all.

The AMD's production status is Active, and its release date is 2025-01-05. The Intel's release date is 2022-09-26, making it roughly two years older. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier and a recorded launch MSRP of $564, while the AMD part is not multiplier-unlocked and has no launch MSRP in the database. The Intel's die size is recorded at 257 mm², while the AMD's die size is not recorded.

Market segments differ: AMD targets mobile with Socket FP11, while Intel targets desktop with Socket 1700. This explains the TDP gap, the memory type, and the presence of integrated graphics on the AMD side. The AMD is a laptop-class processor with a 55 watt envelope, while the Intel is a desktop flagship with a 125 watt envelope and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i9-13900KF scores 6897 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 71.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390's 1976.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 win any benchmark against the Intel Core i9-13900KF?

A: Yes, the AMD part wins PassMark find prime numbers with a score of 323 versus Intel's 225, a 43.6% advantage. This is its only win across the 15 shared tests.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has an average benchmark score of 63765, while the Intel Core i9-13900KF averages 61841. The AMD part is 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G and 0.9% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX in its nearest rival group, while the Intel part sits even with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i9-13900KF supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no memory bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i9-13900KF has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD also has 1 MB of L2 per core versus Intel's 2 MB per core.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel Core i9-13900KF has a TDP of 125 watts. The Intel part also boosts to 5.80 GHz versus the AMD's 5.00 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 | Intel Core i9-13900KF |

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

| Cores | 12 | 24 |

| Threads | 24 | 32 |

| Base clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Raptor Lake-S |

| Process node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Die size | Not recorded | 257 mm² |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 2 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 64 MB shared | 36 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 | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 8050S | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2025-01-05 | 2022-09-26 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $564 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

The Verdict

The data does not support a general recommendation for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 in raw performance terms. The Intel Core i9-13900KF wins 14 of 15 shared benchmarks, with leads ranging from 6.2% in PassMark physics to 71.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core. Anyone selecting a processor purely on measured compute performance should choose the Intel part.

However, the AMD part is not without merit. Its 55 watt TDP against Intel's 125 watts means it achieves roughly half the multi-core performance at less than half the power budget. Its quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is a significant architectural advantage for memory-bound tasks, even if the benchmark data does not isolate that benefit. The integrated Radeon 8050S GPU means the system does not require a discrete graphics card, which is a meaningful differentiator for compact or mobile builds.

The Intel part's advantages are clear: more cores, more threads, higher boost clock, PCIe Gen 5, and an unlocked multiplier. It is a desktop processor designed for maximum performance with no power constraints. The AMD part is a mobile processor designed for efficiency with a strong integrated GPU. The benchmark database records both at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning both are high-end parts, but they serve different physical and thermal contexts.

For users who need the highest possible frame rendering scores, compression throughput, or single-thread responsiveness, the Intel Core i9-13900KF is the only choice in this comparison. For users constrained by power, space, or the need for integrated graphics, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 offers a compelling efficiency profile, but the recorded benchmarks show it losing every performance test except one.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-13900KF wins in every major performance category except prime number finding. Its largest victories are in single-core Cinebench tests, where its 5.80 GHz boost clock produces leads of 56.4% and 71.3%. It also dominates multi-core rendering with a 49.2% lead in Cinebench R23. Data compression, encryption, random string sorting, floating point math, and integer math all favor Intel by margins between 11.3% and 43.6%. The Intel part is the pick for rendering, content creation, compression workloads, and any application that rewards high single-thread performance.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins exactly one benchmark: PassMark find prime numbers, by 43.6%. This indicates a specific algorithmic strength in branch-heavy integer workloads. Beyond that, its advantages are architectural rather than benchmark-visible: the 55 watt TDP, quad-channel LPDDR5X memory, integrated Radeon 8050S GPU, and 64 MB L3 cache. In the recorded data, the AMD part also has a higher average benchmark score (63765 versus 61841), though this reflects the different test sets rather than superior performance. Users who need a mobile processor with high memory bandwidth and integrated graphics should consider the AMD part, while users who need maximum compute throughput in a desktop should choose the Intel.