AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The data separates these two processors along clear architectural and workload lines. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 wins 7 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins 8. The AMD part excels in integer-heavy, encryption-adjacent, and certain multi-threaded tasks, while the Intel part dominates single-core performance and floating-point workloads.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 records an average benchmark score of 80762, placing it at the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 638 (80723, 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX (81103, -0.4% delta). The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus averages 66159, at the 93rd percentile, with rivals such as the Intel Core 9 273PQE (66099, 0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (65914, 0.4% delta). The AMD part holds a 22.1% average score advantage over the Intel part.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput in integer operations, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is the stronger choice. It wins the PassMark multithread test (51502 vs 50146) and delivers a massive 55% lead in integer math. For users needing the fastest possible single-core response, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is clearly superior, with a 66.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and a 49.6% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core. The Intel part also carries an unlocked multiplier and a launch MSRP of $184, though pricing analysis is outside the scope of this data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design approaches. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses a 3 nm process from the same foundry. The Intel part features 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the AMD part does not have transistor or die size data recorded.

Core configurations differ substantially. The AMD part has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel part has 18 cores and 18 threads. The AMD processor runs Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, while the Intel part uses Arrow Lake Refresh architecture under the Core Ultra Series 2 banner. The AMD part's base clock is 3.00 GHz with a 5.10 GHz boost, while the Intel part has a 4.20 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The AMD part offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel part provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and only 30 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more per-core cache, but the AMD part has more than double the total L3 capacity.

Memory support also differs. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. The AMD part includes integrated Radeon 8060S graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics (N/A). The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part targets the mobile segment on Socket FP11, while the Intel part targets the desktop segment on Socket 1851.

The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the AMD part does not. The AMD part launched on 2025-01-05, and the Intel part launched on 2026-03-10. The AMD part number is 100-000001243, and the Intel part number is SA4V3.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 wins in integer-heavy workloads and tasks that benefit from its larger shared L3 cache and 32 threads. Its biggest win is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 190720 against 123030 for the Intel part, a 55% advantage. It also wins PassMark data compression (639356 vs 553155, 15.6% ahead), extended instructions (52067 vs 42880, 21.4% ahead), and multithread (51502 vs 50146, 2.7% ahead). The AMD part also edges out the Intel part in physics (3189 vs 3183, 0.2% ahead) and random string sorting (70150 vs 67209, 4.4% ahead).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in single-core performance and floating-point math. Its most dramatic victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 6030 against 2012.5, a 66.6% lead. It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core (607 vs 306, 49.6% ahead) and PassMark single-thread (4698 vs 4078, 13.2% ahead). In floating-point math, the Intel part scores 159824 against 120533, a 24.6% lead. It wins data encryption (41292 vs 32840, 20.5% ahead) and find prime numbers (452 vs 284, 37.2% ahead).

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel part wins decisively with 42718 against 35061, a 17.9% lead. However, in Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD part wins with 5247 against 4305, a 21.9% lead. This split suggests the AMD part performs relatively better in the older Cinebench version, while the Intel part scales better in the newer one.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 records an average benchmark score of 80762, compared to 66159 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 supports 32 threads from 16 cores. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports 18 threads from 18 cores, meaning it has no hyper-threading.

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins all single-core benchmarks, including a 66.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core (6030 vs 2012.5) and a 13.2% lead in PassMark single-thread (4698 vs 4078).

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The AMD part supports 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel part supports 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 bus.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 includes Radeon 8060S integrated graphics. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 190720 against 123030, a 55% advantage. This result indicates that the AMD part's 32 threads provide substantial throughput for integer operations. The AMD part also wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 21.9% (5247 vs 4305), PassMark extended instructions by 21.4% (52067 vs 42880), and PassMark data compression by 15.6% (639356 vs 553155). In the PassMark multithread test, the AMD part leads by 2.7% (51502 vs 50146), and in physics it leads by a slim 0.2% (3189 vs 3183). Random string sorting goes to the AMD part by 4.4% (70150 vs 67209).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus records its biggest win in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 6030 against 2012.5, a 66.6% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Intel part leads by 49.6% (607 vs 306). The Intel part wins PassMark find prime numbers by 37.2% (452 vs 284), floating-point math by 24.6% (159824 vs 120533), and data encryption by 20.5% (41292 vs 32840). In PassMark single-thread, the Intel part leads by 13.2% (4698 vs 4078), and in Cinebench R23 multicore, it wins by 17.9% (42718 vs 35061).

Overall, the two processors split benchmark wins almost evenly at 7 for AMD and 8 for Intel. The AMD part's wins are concentrated in integer, compression, and extended instruction workloads, while the Intel part's wins are in single-core, floating-point, encryption, and prime number calculations. The Cinebench R23 multicore result is notable: despite the AMD part having 32 threads versus 18 for the Intel part, the Intel part still wins by 17.9%, suggesting the Intel part's higher clock speeds and newer process node compensate for its lower thread count in this workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 | Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus |

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

| Cores | 16 | 18 |

| Threads | 32 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | N/A |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $184 |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-03-10 |