AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 vs Intel Core i7-14701E Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and the Intel Core i7-14701E?

A: The AMD processor provides 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel processor provides 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part doubles both counts.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-14701E boosts to 5.40 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495's 5.20 GHz maximum boost.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD processor supports LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

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 i7-14701E has 33 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How do the two processors compare in PCIe capabilities?

A: The Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Intel offers the newer PCIe generation.

Q: What is the production status and market segment for each?

A: Both are listed as Active in production. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 targets the Mobile market segment, while the Intel Core i7-14701E targets the Desktop segment.

Architecture Differences

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 architecture. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC, with a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core i7-14701E belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename, and is built on a 10 nm process by Intel with a die size of 257 mm².

The AMD processor integrates 16 cores and 32 threads, a configuration that positions it for heavily parallel workloads. The Intel processor offers 8 cores and 16 threads, a more conventional desktop layout. Both use 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache differs: AMD provides 1 MB per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core. The L3 cache also differs substantially, with AMD offering 64 MB versus Intel's 33 MB shared.

Memory architecture separates the two clearly. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, and no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. Both support ECC memory. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1700.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 carries a Radeon 8065S, while the Intel Core i7-14701E carries UHD Graphics 770. The AMD part also has a higher TDP at 55, compared to the Intel part at 65, which is notable given the AMD processor's larger core count. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data only includes scores for the Intel Core i7-14701E, with an average benchmark score of 33206 and a percentile ranking of 83 against all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of 0, with a percentile ranking of 50. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and neither processor records a win in the winsA or winsB fields.

The Intel Core i7-14701E sits in the 83rd percentile, placing it above the AMD part's 50th percentile in the database's distribution. The Intel processor's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H with an average score of 33201 and a delta of 0 percent, the AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS with 33244 and a delta of -0.1 percent, the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX with 33091 and a delta of 0.3 percent, and the Intel Core i7-13650HX with 33089 and a delta of 0.4 percent. These deltas are all within a narrow band, indicating that the Intel Core i7-14701E performs comparably to those four parts in aggregate scoring.

For users selecting between these two processors, the data indicates that the Intel Core i7-14701E has a recorded performance profile and a high percentile ranking, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 lacks recorded benchmark scores. The AMD part offers more cores, threads, and L3 cache, plus a higher memory bandwidth figure, but no measured performance data exists to confirm how those specifications translate into benchmark results. The Intel part has a higher boost clock, a newer PCIe generation, and a lower TDP. The choice depends on whether the user prioritizes the AMD part's raw core and cache specifications or the Intel part's recorded benchmark performance and higher percentile placement.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ.

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 | Intel Core i7-14701E |

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

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 55 | 65 |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | (Zen 5) | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Gorgon Halo | Raptor Lake-R |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO (Zen 5) | Core i7 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 33 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 273.1 GB/s | (not recorded) |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8065S | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-05-19 | 2024-06-30 |

| Part Number | 100-000002124 | Q49FSRNJK |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, meaning no direct paired test results exist for these two processors. However, the Intel Core i7-14701E has a full set of individual benchmark scores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has none. The analysis below therefore relies on the Intel part's recorded results and the absence of AMD data.

The Intel Core i7-14701E delivers its strongest recorded results in multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 22195. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it scores 9321. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 2237. These results show a consistent scaling pattern across the three Cinebench versions. The PassMark multithread score is 26112, and the PassMark integer math score is 81325. The PassMark floating point math score is 61873, which is lower than integer math but still substantial. The PassMark extended instructions score is 18528, and the PassMark data compression score is 282939.

Single-thread performance on the Intel part is also recorded. The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 3133, the Cinebench R20 single-core score is 1315, and the Cinebench R15 single-core score is 315. The PassMark single thread score is 4305. These figures indicate a capable single-thread profile, consistent with the 5.40 GHz boost clock.

Other recorded PassMark scores for the Intel Core i7-14701E include data encryption at 14862, find prime numbers at 176, physics at 2399, and random string sorting at 29158. The find prime numbers score is notably low relative to other workloads, which may reflect the specific instruction mix used in that test. The physics score is also modest compared to the multithread and math results.

Since the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has no recorded benchmark scores, the database provides no direct comparison for any workload. The AMD part's 16 cores and 32 threads suggest potential for high multi-threaded performance, but the recorded data does not confirm this. The Intel part's 83rd percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 33206 stand as the only measured performance indicators between the two. Its nearest rivals all score within a range from 33089 to 33244, with deltas between -0.1 percent and 0.4 percent, showing that the Intel Core i7-14701E performs in a tight cluster with those four processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495, despite its higher core count and cache size, has no comparable data to place it in that cluster or any other.