AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 vs Intel Core i5-14600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and the Intel Core i5-14600. The AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Intel chip has an extensive set of measurements across Cinebench, Geekbench, and Passmark suites. This absence of comparative data means the analysis must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than direct performance deltas.

For the Intel Core i5-14600, the recorded data shows a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30,464 and a single-core score of 4,300. In Cinebench R20, it scores 12,794 multi-core and 1,806 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test yields 3,070 multi-core and 433 single-core. Geekbench results show 14,680 multi-core and 2,424 single-core. Passmark tests include a multi-thread score of 35,848, single-thread of 4,167, integer math at 117,078, floating-point math at 85,759, data compression at 434,620, data encryption at 25,082, extended instructions at 25,674, prime number finding at 155, physics at 2,330, and random string sorting at 48,043.

The Intel chip holds a 89th percentile rank among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 44,889. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-12900KS at 45,094 (0.5% higher), the AMD EPYC 4344P at 45,122 (0.5% higher), the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D at 44,573 (0.7% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H at 44,466 (1% lower). These tight margins place the i5-14600 within a narrow performance band among contemporary processors.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495, by contrast, has zero recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile rank with an average score of 0. The wins count shows 0 for both processors in the head-to-head field, confirming the lack of direct comparison data.

Where Each One Wins

Without direct benchmark comparisons, the wins must be inferred from the specification sheet. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 offers 16 cores and 32 threads, which exceeds the Intel chip's 14 cores and 20 threads. This gives the AMD part a theoretical advantage in heavily threaded workloads such as video rendering, compiler jobs, or scientific simulations. The AMD processor also carries a larger L3 cache at 64 MB versus 24 MB on the Intel side, which can benefit data-heavy tasks where repeated access to a working set matters.

The Intel Core i5-14600 counters with a 65-watt TDP versus the AMD part's 55 watts, so the Intel chip is rated for higher sustained power draw. Its boost clock matches the AMD part at 5.20 GHz, and its base clock is 2.70 GHz compared to 3.10 GHz on the AMD chip. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD part only supports LPDDR5X. This flexibility on the Intel side allows builders to choose cheaper DDR4 or faster DDR5 depending on motherboard and budget constraints.

The AMD part has a quad-channel memory bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth, which is substantially higher than the Intel chip's dual-channel configuration (the database lists no bandwidth figure for the Intel part). This memory bandwidth advantage positions the AMD processor for memory-bound workloads like large dataset processing or in-memory databases. The Intel chip supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe standard on the Intel side enables faster data transfer to compatible GPUs and NVMe drives.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses the Gorgon Halo codename under the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO generation, built on Zen 5 cores. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core i5-14600 belongs to the Core 14th Gen series with the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, and uses the Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 257 mm².

These process differences are significant. The AMD part's 4 nm node from TSMC is denser than Intel's 10 nm process, which typically allows more transistors per area and lower power leakage. The AMD die is split into two 70.6 mm² chiplets, whereas the Intel processor uses a single monolithic 257 mm² die. The multi-chiplet design on the AMD side can improve manufacturing yields and allow different components to use optimized processes, while the Intel monolithic design reduces inter-chiplet communication overhead.

The cache hierarchies diverge in structure. Both processors allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD part uses 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel chip uses 2 MB per core. For L3, the AMD processor has 64 MB (the database does not specify whether it is shared), while the Intel chip has 24 MB shared. The larger L3 on the AMD side, combined with the per-core L2 differences, gives the AMD part a total cache footprint that is substantially larger, which can reduce latency for frequently accessed data.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD processor pairs with a Radeon 8065S, while the Intel chip uses UHD Graphics 770. The Radeon part is expected to deliver higher graphics performance given its positioning, but the database provides no benchmark scores for either GPU, so the comparison remains qualitative. The AMD part also has a release date of 2026-05-19, two years after the Intel chip's 2024-01-07 release, indicating a newer design generation.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on several key specification fields. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14600 has 14 cores and 20 threads. The AMD base clock is 3.10 GHz versus 2.70 GHz on the Intel part, but both share the same 5.20 GHz boost clock. The AMD TDP is 55 watts, the Intel TDP is 65 watts.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP11, while Intel uses Socket 1700. The memory support differs, with the AMD part supporting only LPDDR5X on a quad-channel bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with no listed bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe generations differ: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The process node is 4 nm for AMD and 10 nm for Intel. The foundries are TSMC and Intel, respectively. The die sizes are 2x 70.6 mm² for AMD and 257 mm² for Intel. The market segments differ: the AMD part is mobile, the Intel part is desktop.

The integrated graphics differ, with the Radeon 8065S on the AMD side and UHD Graphics 770 on the Intel side. The release dates are 2026-05-19 for AMD and 2024-01-07 for Intel. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $255, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are 100-000002124 for AMD and SRN44 for Intel. The AMD codename is Gorgon Halo, the Intel codename is Raptor Lake-R.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14600 has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for both processors?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and the Intel Core i5-14600 have a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The base clocks differ, with the AMD part at 3.10 GHz and the Intel part at 2.70 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has 64 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Core i5-14600 has 24 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 supports LPDDR5X on a quad-channel bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i5-14600 supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure listed in the database.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel Core i5-14600 has a TDP of 65 watts.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile rank in the database?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600 ranks in the 89th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 44,889. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 ranks in the 50th percentile with an average score of 0 due to having no recorded benchmarks.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear asymmetry. The Intel Core i5-14600 has extensive benchmark results showing it operates in the upper tier of CPUs, with a 89th percentile rank and an average score of 44,889. Its nearest rivals are all within 1% of its score, indicating consistent mid-to-high-end desktop performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30,464 and single-core score of 4,300 place it as a competent processor for both threaded and single-threaded tasks. The Passmark multi-thread score of 35,848 and single-thread score of 4,167 reinforce this picture.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has no benchmark data at all. Its 50th percentile rank with a zero average score reflects the absence of measurements rather than actual performance. However, the specification sheet shows a newer architecture (Zen 5 on 4 nm versus Raptor Lake on 10 nm), more cores and threads (16/32 versus 14/20), a much larger L3 cache (64 MB versus 24 MB), and a quad-channel memory bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth. These specifications suggest the AMD part is designed for bandwidth-intensive, heavily threaded workloads, particularly in mobile platforms where its 55-watt TDP and LPDDR5X support make sense.

The choice depends on what the data actually supports. For anyone relying on recorded measurements, the Intel Core i5-14600 is the only option with verified performance numbers. Its benchmark scores are competitive with its nearest rivals, and its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 gives builders flexibility in platform selection. The PCIe Gen 5 interface is also a forward-looking feature. The desktop form factor and Socket 1700 compatibility make it a straightforward drop-in for existing LGA1700 motherboards.

For the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495, the data only shows its architecture and specifications. The 16-core, 32-thread configuration with 64 MB of L3 and 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth indicates a processor built for parallel workloads that saturate memory channels. The mobile market segment and FP11 socket suggest it targets laptops or compact systems rather than traditional desktop builds. The 2026 release date means it is a newer design, but without benchmark scores, its actual performance relative to the Intel chip cannot be quantified.

The database shows zero wins for either processor in head-to-head tests, confirming that no direct comparison exists. Builders who need verified performance data should look at the Intel chip's benchmark results. Those who prioritize raw specifications for multi-threaded, memory-heavy workloads on a mobile platform should consider the AMD part's architectural advantages. The Intel chip is the only one with a launch MSRP of $255, while the AMD part has no listed price. The decision rests on whether the AMD part's specifications translate to real-world performance, which the current data cannot confirm.