AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into clear territories. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 wins 11 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H takes 4. The AMD part dominates heavily in multi-threaded and memory-sensitive workloads, while the Intel part claims narrow victories in single-threaded and prime-number computation tasks.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is the decisive winner for any workload that scales across cores. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35061 versus 18747 for the Intel part represents an 87% advantage. PassMark integer math shows a 129.4% lead (190720 versus 83147), and data compression delivers a 92.3% gap (639356 versus 332508). These are not marginal differences; the AMD processor effectively doubles the throughput in several integer and compression tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H wins in exactly four areas: Cinebench R23 single-core (2080 versus 2012.5, a 3.2% edge), PassMark find prime numbers (337 versus 284, a 15.7% edge), and two identical single-thread PassMark scores (4124 versus 4078, a 1.1% edge). These wins are consistent and repeatable, but they are all in the single-threaded or specialized math domain. The prime number search is notably the Intel part's largest victory, suggesting its per-core integer pipeline is efficient for that particular workload.

For floating-point math, the AMD part leads by 16.1% (120533 versus 103842). For physics simulation, the lead narrows to 5.6% (3189 versus 3021). The pattern is clear: AMD wins where thread count and memory bandwidth matter, Intel wins where a single thread's efficiency is the deciding factor.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture. The AMD part records an average of 80762 across all tests, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel part averages 40967, placing it in the 87th percentile. The AMD processor's nearest rivals are workstation-class Xeon parts (Intel Xeon 638 at 80723, Intel Xeon w5-2565X at 80671), while the Intel part's nearest rivals are other mobile APUs (AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41208, Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41215). This is a stark difference in performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Halo, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, meaning each core supports two threads via simultaneous multithreading. The base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, and the package TDP is 55 watts.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses the Panther Lake codename from the Core Ultra Series 3 generation. It is fabricated on Intel's own 3 nm process. It also has 16 cores but only 16 threads, indicating no multithreading on any core. The base clock is 1.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, and the TDP is 25 watts.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD part provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's much larger L3 cache (64 MB versus 18 MB) is a major factor in its compression and integer math wins, as more data can reside on-chip.

Memory architecture is another key split. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part also uses LPDDR5X but with a dual-channel bus, delivering 153.6 GB/s. The 102.4 GB/s bandwidth advantage for AMD directly supports its multi-threaded and data-heavy workloads.

PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part's PCIe standard is newer, but the lane count is much lower. ECC memory support is present on the AMD part and absent on the Intel part.

Integrated graphics also differ: the AMD part uses a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel part uses an Arc B390. Both are active mobile processors, with the AMD part released on 2025-01-05 and the Intel part released on 2026-01-04. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test is the largest single benchmark gap. The AMD processor scores 35061 versus 18747, a delta of 87%. This is the headline number for the comparison, showing that the AMD part's 32 threads and 64 MB L3 cache deliver nearly double the multi-threaded rendering performance.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 5247 versus 3027, a 73.3% lead. The single-core R15 test is much closer, with AMD at 306 and Intel at 301.5, a mere 1.5% difference. The R23 single-core test flips the result: Intel scores 2080 versus AMD's 2012.5, a 3.2% edge for Intel.

PassMark integer math is the single largest percentage win for AMD at 129.4% (190720 versus 83147). This test measures raw integer arithmetic throughput, and the AMD part's combination of 32 threads and high memory bandwidth produces a result more than double the Intel part.

Data compression shows a 92.3% AMD lead (639356 versus 332508). Extended instructions show a 90.9% lead (52067 versus 27274). Random string sorting shows a 73.8% lead (70150 versus 40357). These three tests all involve moving and transforming large data sets, where the AMD part's 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 64 MB L3 cache provide a decisive advantage.

Data encryption shows a 26.1% AMD lead (32840 versus 26046). Floating-point math shows a 16.1% lead (120533 versus 103842). Multithreaded PassMark shows a 52.4% lead (51502 versus 33802). Physics simulation shows a narrow 5.6% lead (3189 versus 3021).

The Intel part's wins are smaller in absolute terms. The prime number test shows Intel at 337 versus AMD at 284, a 15.7% edge. The single-thread PassMark shows Intel at 4124 versus AMD at 4078, a 1.1% edge. The R23 single-core shows Intel at 2080 versus AMD at 2012.5, a 3.2% edge. These wins confirm that Intel's single-core efficiency is real, but it does not compensate for the massive multi-threaded deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has 32 threads from 16 cores, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 threads from 16 cores. The AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD part uses a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus delivering 256.0 GB/s. The Intel part uses a dual-channel LPDDR5X bus delivering 153.6 GB/s. The AMD part has 102.4 GB/s more bandwidth.

Q: Which processor performs better in single-core tests?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H wins in Cinebench R23 single-core (2080 versus 2012.5) and PassMark single-thread (4124 versus 4078). The AMD part wins in Cinebench R15 single-core by a narrow 1.5% margin (306 versus 301.5).

Q: How large is the L3 cache on each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD part has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel part has a TDP of 25 watts.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 boosts up to 5.10 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H boosts up to 4.80 GHz.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following specification fields:

• Threads: AMD has 32, Intel has 16.
• Base Clock: AMD at 3.00 GHz, Intel at 1.90 GHz.
• Boost Clock: AMD at 5.10 GHz, Intel at 4.80 GHz.
• TDP: AMD at 55 watts, Intel at 25 watts.
• Socket: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel BGA 2540.
• Process Node: AMD on 4 nm (TSMC), Intel on 3 nm (Intel foundry).
• Codename: Strix Halo versus Panther Lake.
• Generation: Ryzen AI Max+ PRO (Zen 5) versus Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H).
• L1 Cache: AMD at 80 KB per core, Intel at 192 KB per core.
• L2 Cache: AMD at 1 MB per core, Intel at 3 MB per core.
• L3 Cache: AMD at 64 MB shared, Intel at 18 MB shared.
• Memory Bus: Quad-channel versus dual-channel.
• Memory Bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s.
• ECC Memory: Supported on AMD, not supported on Intel.
• PCIe: Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only).
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 8060S versus Arc B390.
• Release Date: 2025-01-05 versus 2026-01-04.
• Part Number: 100-000001243 versus SA4RAQ9ET.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is the superior processor for multi-threaded workloads, data compression, encryption, integer math, and any task that benefits from high memory bandwidth and large cache. Its 87% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 92.3% lead in data compression, and 129.4% lead in integer math are decisive. The 95th percentile ranking and average score of 80762 place it near workstation Xeon processors.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is the better choice only for workloads that are strictly single-threaded or that rely on a specific integer operation like prime number searching. Its wins are consistent but narrow, ranging from 1.1% to 15.7%. The 87th percentile ranking and average score of 40967 place it among mid-range mobile APUs.

The AMD part uses 55 watts versus 25 watts for Intel, so the performance advantage comes with a higher power envelope. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. For any user prioritizing raw compute throughput, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is the clear winner from the recorded benchmarks. For users with strict power limits and single-threaded application needs, the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H offers a modest single-core edge but at a large multi-threaded cost.