AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M sit at nearly identical average benchmark scores, with the AMD part at 58362 and the Intel part at 58323, a delta of just 0.1%. This statistical tie masks a starkly different performance profile, as the data reveals a 15-to-2 split in individual benchmark wins. The AMD processor's victories are decisive in compute-heavy tasks, while the Intel Xeon claims two specialized memory-oriented workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern is the uniformity of the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390’s wins in Cinebench tests. Across all six Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 runs, the AMD chip wins by a consistent 24.8% to 24.9%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD scores 36710 against the Intel's 29403, while in R23 single-core it posts 5182 versus 4151. This consistent delta across both single- and multi-threaded render workloads indicates a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a core-count effect.

The AMD chip also dominates PassMark integer math, scoring 150375 versus 129213, a 16.4% advantage. Floating-point math shows an even larger gap: 96002 versus 73514, a 30.6% win for AMD. The PassMark multi-thread score follows the same trend, with AMD at 43189 and Intel at 34592, a 24.9% difference. Physics calculations in PassMark favor AMD by 33.1%, with scores of 2769 and 2080 respectively.

The single-thread gap is the most pronounced. AMD's PassMark single-thread score of 3997 beats Intel's 2320 by 72.3%. This is a massive lead that explains why the AMD chip wins even in single-core Cinebench tests by nearly a quarter. The encryption test also shows a large AMD advantage: 26115 versus 17625, a 48.2% delta. Extended instruction workloads go to AMD by 14.5%, with scores of 40687 and 35529.

The prime number finding test is the outlier in magnitude. AMD scores 333 versus Intel's 141, a 136.2% advantage. This workload is highly sensitive to clock speed and per-core efficiency, both of which favor the AMD design.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M wins only two benchmarks, both in PassMark. Data compression goes to Intel at 573896 versus 505322, an 11.9% margin. Random string sorting is the other Intel win, at 69236 versus 55663, a 19.6% advantage. These are the only areas where the Intel processor's higher core count and thread count translate into a measurable performance lead.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins in every rendering workload, every single-thread test, and all math-intensive operations. Its PassMark physics score of 2769 indicates strong performance in simulation workloads. The 72.3% single-thread lead means that any application with serial bottlenecks will favor AMD. The 48.2% encryption advantage points to strong security and data-protection workloads. The 136.2% prime number score suggests the AMD chip is well-suited for integer-heavy algorithms, cryptography, or any workload that benefits from high clock speeds.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M wins in data compression and random string sorting. These workloads often benefit from higher thread counts and specific memory-access patterns that the Intel platform can exploit. The 573896 data compression score is the highest single benchmark result for either processor, showing that the Intel chip remains competitive in storage-related or data-transfer-heavy tasks. Random string sorting, at 69236, indicates strong performance in database-style sorting operations.

For general productivity, the AMD chip is the clear winner. For specialized data-processing pipelines involving compression or sorting, the Intel chip holds a specific edge. The AMD processor is also superior in every multi-core rendering test, despite having 12 cores versus the Intel's 24 cores, which suggests that core count alone does not dictate performance in these workloads.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M uses the Cascade Lake architecture on Intel's 14 nm process, with 24 cores and 48 threads, a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The AMD part is built with 8,000 million transistors on the Intel side, while the AMD transistor count is not provided.

The cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 35.75 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD processor's larger L3 cache is nearly double the Intel's, which likely contributes to its strong performance in single-thread and math workloads.

The AMD chip supports LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel chip supports DDR4 memory, with no bandwidth figure provided. Both support ECC memory. The AMD chip has integrated Radeon 8050S graphics, while the Intel chip has no integrated graphics. The AMD chip uses the AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 3647. The AMD part is released in 2025, while the Intel part is released in 2018.

The AMD chip is classified as a mobile segment processor, while the Intel chip is a server/workstation part. The AMD processor is actively in production, while the Intel processor's production status is not listed. The AMD chip has a 55 TDP, while the Intel chip has a 165 TDP.

Specification Differences

The core count differs: 12 cores for AMD versus 24 cores for Intel, with 24 threads versus 48 threads. The base clock differs: 3.20 GHz versus 2.40 GHz. The boost clock differs: 5.00 GHz versus 3.90 GHz. The TDP differs: 55 versus 165. The process node differs: 4 nm versus 14 nm. The foundry differs: TSMC versus Intel.

The cache differs: 80 KB L1 per core versus 64 KB L1 per core, and 64 MB shared L3 versus 35.75 MB shared L3. The memory support differs: LPDDR5X versus DDR4. The memory bus is quad-channel for AMD, while Intel's bus is not specified. The memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s for AMD, while Intel's is not specified.

The socket differs: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel Socket 3647. The integrated graphics differ: Radeon 8050S for AMD versus none for Intel. The market segment differs: Mobile versus Server/Workstation. The release date differs: 2025-01-05 for AMD versus 2018-12-10 for Intel. The part numbers differ: 100-000001421 for AMD versus SRF9JCD8069504201201 for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has an average benchmark score of 58362, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M has a score of 58323. The AMD chip leads by 0.1%.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: In PassMark single-thread testing, the AMD chip scores 3997 versus the Intel's 2320, resulting in a 72.3% advantage for AMD.

Q: In which benchmarks does the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M win?

A: The Intel chip wins in PassMark data compression (573896 versus 505322) and PassMark random string sorting (69236 versus 55663).

Q: What is the core count difference?

A: The AMD chip has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel chip has 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the AMD chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 supports LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M support ECC memory.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins 15 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, with an average score that is slightly higher than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M. The AMD chip is the superior choice for rendering, single-thread performance, math workloads, encryption, and physics simulations. Its 72.3% single-thread lead and 24.9% multi-core Cinebench advantage make it the better processor for almost any compute task.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is only preferable in data compression and random string sorting, where it leads by 11.9% and 19.6% respectively. For workloads that specifically involve these operations, the Intel chip has a measurable edge. The Intel processor also offers double the core count and thread count, which may matter in specific server environments where raw thread availability is a factor.

The AMD chip achieves its performance with a 55 TDP versus the Intel's 165 TDP, and it does so with a 4 nm process versus Intel's 14 nm process. The AMD chip also includes integrated Radeon 8050S graphics, which the Intel chip lacks. For a mobile or compact workstation, the AMD processor is the clear choice. For a server that processes large datasets through compression and sorting pipelines, the Intel chip retains a specific purpose. Otherwise, the data favors the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 in nearly every measurable workload.