AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 is not recorded in the database, which means a direct score comparison with the Intel Core 7 350 is not possible. The Intel Core 7 350, however, has a full set of recorded measurements across Cinebench and PassMark tests. Its average benchmark score is 17779, placing it at the 71st percentile of all CPUs in the database.

The Intel Core 7 350's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its performance. The Intel Core 5 221TE scores 17860, which is 0.5% ahead of the Core 7 350. The AMD EPYC 9374F scores 17693, placing it 0.5% behind. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT scores 17891, 0.6% ahead, and the Intel Core 5 120U scores 17898, 0.7% ahead. These delta values show the Core 7 350 sits in a tight cluster of comparable processors, within roughly one percentage point of each rival in either direction.

Looking at the Core 7 350's individual Cinebench results, the multi-core scores show a clear scaling pattern across versions. Cinebench R15 multi-core delivers 1220, Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 5373, and Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers 8030. The single-core results follow a similar progression: 292 in R15, 758 in R20, and 2046 in R23. The ratio between R23 multi-core and R23 single-core is roughly 3.9 to 1, indicating that the six physical cores with no hyper-threading still provide substantial parallel scaling.

PassMark tests reveal specific strengths. The data compression score is 143123, which is the highest raw number across all the processor's recorded tests. Integer math scores 33734, floating point math scores 42809, and extended instructions score 12045. The multithread test scores 15170, while the single-thread test scores 4100. Find prime numbers scores 107, a relatively low figure that reflects the workload's sensitivity to certain instruction patterns rather than raw clock speed. Random string sorting scores 17238, data encryption scores 10933, and physics scores 1173.

Because the AMD part has no benchmark entries, the head-to-head comparison cannot be quantified. The database records zero wins for each side in this pairing. The absence of scores for the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 means any direct performance judgment between these two specific units must remain qualitative, based on architectural specifications rather than measured results.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database shows an empty benchmarks array for the AMD part, along with an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50. The Intel Core 7 350 has 17 recorded benchmark scores and a 71st percentile rank.

Q: What is the Intel Core 7 350's closest rival according to the database?

A: The AMD EPYC 9374F has an average score of 17693, which is 0.5% behind the Core 7 350's 17779. The Intel Core 5 221TE is 0.5% ahead at 17860, making both rivals nearly identical in measured performance.

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 350's single-thread performance compare to its multi-thread performance?

A: In Cinebench R23, the single-core score is 2046 and the multi-core score is 8030. The multi-core result is approximately 3.9 times the single-core result, which aligns with a six-core, six-thread design where each physical core contributes without hyper-threading overhead.

Q: Which memory configurations does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 supports LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and 273.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 350 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 350 support ECC memory?

A: No. The database lists ECC memory support as false for the Intel Core 7 350. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 lists ECC memory support as true.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core 7 350 uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses the Gorgon Halo codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO generation built on the Zen 5 core architecture. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation built on the Wildcat Lake core architecture.

The core counts diverge sharply. The AMD part provides 16 cores and 32 threads, a symmetric multi-threaded design where every core has a corresponding thread. The Intel part provides 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyper-threading enabled. This means the AMD processor has more than double the core count and more than five times the thread count of the Intel processor.

Cache hierarchies follow different strategies. The AMD processor allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, then pools 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel processor allocates 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, but only shares 6 MB of L3 cache across all cores. The AMD part's total L3 cache is more than ten times larger than the Intel part's shared L3.

Memory architecture reinforces the performance divide. The AMD processor uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, achieving 273.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel processor also supports LPDDR5X but adds DDR5 support, and uses a single-channel bus that delivers 59.7 GB/s. The AMD part's memory bandwidth is roughly 4.6 times higher, which matters for workloads that stream large datasets through the cache hierarchy.

The integrated graphics differ in both branding and scale. The AMD processor integrates Radeon 8065S graphics, while the Intel processor integrates Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database does not record performance scores for either integrated GPU, so no measured comparison is available.

Both processors use PCIe Gen 4 connectivity, but the lane counts differ. The AMD processor provides 16 CPU-only lanes, while the Intel processor provides 6 CPU-only lanes. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either part.

The process nodes also reflect different foundry choices. The AMD processor uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel processor uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with no die size recorded. A smaller process node typically allows higher transistor density, but the database does not include transistor counts for either processor.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: the AMD part runs at 3.10 GHz, the Intel part at 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks are closer but still distinct: the AMD part reaches 5.20 GHz, the Intel part reaches 4.80 GHz.

Thermal design power shows a major divergence. The AMD processor has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel processor has a TDP of 15 watts. This 40-watt gap indicates different target platforms: the AMD part requires more substantial cooling, while the Intel part fits into lower-power chassis.

Socket compatibility is entirely separate. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1516. These sockets are not interchangeable, so motherboard choice is locked to the respective platform.

Process node and foundry differ as well. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel part uses a 3 nm process from Intel, with no die size recorded in the database.

Cache specifications differ at every level. The AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB L3. The Intel part has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB L3 shared. The AMD part's larger L3 cache is the most significant difference, as it provides far more on-die storage for frequently accessed data.

Memory support reveals different capabilities. The AMD part supports only LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory support is present on the AMD part but absent on the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity differs in lane count. The AMD part provides 16 Gen 4 lanes, while the Intel part provides 6 Gen 4 lanes. Integrated graphics differ by brand: Radeon 8065S on the AMD side, Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores on the Intel side.

Release dates are close but not identical. The Intel Core 7 350 was released on April 15, 2026. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 was released on May 19, 2026. Both processors are listed as active in production status and target the mobile market segment. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $469, which is stated once here. The database does not provide a launch MSRP for the AMD part.

The Verdict

The recorded data provides a clear picture for the Intel Core 7 350 and a largely empty picture for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495. The Intel processor has a full suite of benchmark scores, a 71st percentile ranking, and an average score of 17779. Its nearest rivals, all within 0.7% of its average score, confirm it sits in a well-established performance tier for mobile processors.

The AMD processor has no recorded benchmarks. Its percentile rank of 50 and average score of 0 are placeholders, not measurements. The database shows zero wins for either side in this head-to-head pairing, because no head-to-head benchmark entries exist.

From a specification standpoint, the AMD part appears designed for a different performance envelope. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, 64 MB of L3 cache, quad-channel memory with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth, and 55 watt TDP suggest a processor aimed at compute-heavy mobile workloads. The Intel part, with 6 cores and 6 threads, 6 MB of L3 cache, single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, and 15 watt TDP, targets efficiency and light-to-moderate workloads where battery life and thermal constraints dominate.

The choice between these two processors depends entirely on the workload requirements. For users who need many parallel threads, large cache capacity, and high memory bandwidth, the AMD part's specifications offer the necessary headroom. For users who prioritize low power consumption, the Intel part's 15 watt TDP represents a much lighter thermal footprint. The absence of benchmark data for the AMD part means its actual performance cannot be verified against the Intel part's measured scores. The Intel Core 7 350 is the only one of the two with empirical evidence in the database, and its scores place it in the 71st percentile, comfortably above the midpoint of all recorded CPUs.