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

Intel Core i9-13900KS and AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 sit at the same 93rd percentile of all CPUs, yet their average benchmark scores could hardly tell a more different story. The Intel part edges ahead with an average score of 64,051 versus 63,765 for the AMD, a mere 0.4% gap, but that overall parity masks a lopsided head-to-head record: the Core i9-13900KS wins 14 of 15 direct comparisons, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 takes only one. The data points to two fundamentally different design philosophies—one a high-power desktop monster built for maximum throughput, the other a low-power mobile processor with an integrated GPU and memory bandwidth that changes the calculus for portable systems.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-13900KS is the clear winner in almost every compute-heavy workload. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 51,368 against 24,828 for the AMD part, a 106.9% advantage that more than doubles the Ryzen's output. The single-core gap is even more extreme: 7,252 versus 1,976 in Cinebench R23 single-core, a 267% lead. This pattern repeats across PassMark tests—floating point math (154,805 vs 94,666, +63.5%), integer math (211,027 vs 148,508, +42.1%), and multithread (60,644 vs 42,912, +41.3%). The Intel chip also dominates data compression (814,838 vs 506,170, +61%) and data encryption (47,772 vs 26,027, +83.5%). For anyone running rendering, scientific simulation, or heavy data processing, the i9-13900KS is the only choice between these two.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins exactly one benchmark: PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 323 versus 257, a 20.4% advantage. This is a narrow, specialized victory in a single-threaded integer workload, but it signals that Zen 5's per-core efficiency can outperform Intel's architecture in specific algorithmic patterns. More importantly, the AMD part's real strengths lie outside these CPU-centric tests. It pairs 12 cores with 24 threads, a 64 MB shared L3 cache, and a Radeon 8050S integrated GPU, while supporting LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus delivering 256.0 GB/s—nearly three times the Intel's 89.6 GB/s. The data shows the Intel wins raw CPU benchmarks, but the AMD wins on platform integration for mobile systems where CPU alone isn't the whole story.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. Intel's Core i9-13900KS uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry, while AMD's Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses Zen 5 on a 4 nm process from TSMC. That process gap explains a lot: the Intel chip draws 150 W TDP and is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, whereas the AMD chip is a mobile part on AMD Socket FP11 with a 55 W TDP. The Intel chip packs 24 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz boosting to 6.00 GHz; the AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, also at a 3.20 GHz base but boosting to only 5.00 GHz. Cache hierarchies differ sharply: Intel offers 2 MB L2 per core and 36 MB shared L3, while AMD offers 1 MB L2 per core and 64 MB shared L3. The larger L3 on the AMD part helps mitigate its smaller core count in some workloads, but the head-to-head results show it cannot overcome Intel's raw core advantage.

Memory support diverges completely. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus at 89.6 GB/s, with ECC memory supported. AMD uses LPDDR5X exclusively over a quad-channel bus at 256.0 GB/s, also with ECC support. PCIe lanes also differ: Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are present on both—Intel's UHD Graphics 770 versus AMD's Radeon 8050S—but the AMD's memory bandwidth and GPU architecture make it more suited for graphics work in a compact form factor. The Intel chip's multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking, while the AMD part is locked. Production status for both is active, but the Intel released on 2023-01-11 with a launch MSRP of $699, while the AMD released on 2025-01-05 with no listed MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900KS is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 51,368 versus 24,828 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390, a 106.9% difference. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar gap: 5,177 versus 3,918, a 32.1% lead for Intel.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 competitive in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in exactly one test: PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 323 versus 257 for Intel, a 20.4% advantage. It also has superior memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s vs 89.6 GB/s) and a more power-efficient design at 55 W TDP versus 150 W, but in raw CPU benchmarks it loses 14 of 15 comparisons.

Q: How do their single-core performances compare?

A: Intel wins overwhelmingly. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 7,252 versus 1,976 for AMD, a 267% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 730 versus 303, a 140.9% difference. PassMark single-thread is closer but still Intel-led: 4,712 versus 3,967, an 18.8% gap.

Q: What memory types do each support?

A: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. AMD supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance class overall?

A: Yes, both sit at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical—64,051 for Intel and 63,765 for AMD, a 0.4% difference. However, the distribution of wins is heavily skewed toward Intel in head-to-head tests.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: Intel has 24 cores and 32 threads, while AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads. Intel also has a higher boost clock at 6.00 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, and a larger L2 cache per core (2 MB vs 1 MB), though AMD has a larger L3 cache (64 MB vs 36 MB).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-13900KS | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 12 |

| Threads | 32 | 24 |

| Boost Clock | 6.00 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 150 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket FP11 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 5 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

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

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes | Gen 4, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Radeon 8050S |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2023-01-11 | 2025-01-05 |

| Launch MSRP | $699 | None |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for Intel comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 7,252 against 1,976 for AMD—a 267% advantage. This is not a marginal edge; it's a complete rout, indicating that Intel's Raptor Lake architecture at 6.00 GHz boost has a per-thread performance ceiling that Zen 5 at 5.00 GHz cannot approach in this test. Cinebench R23 multi-core follows with a 106.9% lead (51,368 vs 24,828), showcasing the value of 24 cores versus 12. The data encryption test shows an 83.5% gap (47,772 vs 26,027), and floating point math is 63.5% higher for Intel (154,805 vs 94,666). These are not close calls; the Intel part is decisively ahead across nearly every metric.

The AMD's sole victory in PassMark find prime numbers (323 vs 257, +20.4%) is worth examining. This test measures a specific integer operation pattern, and Zen 5's architecture appears to handle it more efficiently per core. However, the overall pattern is clear: Intel wins 14 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average deltaPct that exceeds 50% in several cases. Even in the closest Intel win—PassMark extended instructions at 17.9% (48,217 vs 40,888)—the margin is substantial. The only test where AMD comes within single digits of winning is PassMark single-thread (4,712 vs 3,967, +18.8% for Intel), but even that remains firmly in Intel's column.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-13900KS is the superior CPU for raw compute performance. It leads in 14 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, often by margins exceeding 50%, and its 24 cores and 32 threads provide a multi-core advantage that the AMD's 12 cores and 24 threads cannot match. For desktop users who need maximum rendering speed, data processing, or single-thread responsiveness, the i9-13900KS is the only logical choice between these two. Its 150 W TDP and desktop socket are acceptable trade-offs for that performance.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 earns its place in a different context. It is a mobile part with a 55 W TDP, a Radeon 8050S integrated GPU, and 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth over LPDDR5X. While it loses decisively in CPU benchmarks, its platform-level advantages—quad-channel memory, integrated graphics, and power efficiency—make it a compelling option for compact laptops where CPU benchmarks alone don't dictate the experience. The single benchmark win in find prime numbers shows Zen 5 has strengths in specific workloads, but it's not enough to recommend the AMD part for CPU-centric tasks. Choose Intel for performance, AMD for a power-efficient mobile platform with strong memory bandwidth and graphics integration.

Both CPUs sit at the 93rd percentile, but that shared ranking obscures how differently they serve their markets. The i9-13900KS is a performance flagship; the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is a balanced mobile processor. The benchmark record reflects that split, with Intel dominating the compute tests and AMD offering a more efficient, graphics-capable package for portable systems.