AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 vs Intel Processor U301L Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and the Intel Processor U301L?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Processor U301L uses 5 cores and 6 threads. The AMD part offers more than three times the core count and more than five times the thread count.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Processor U301L has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 2.20 GHz. The AMD part has a significantly higher frequency range in both metrics.

Q: What memory types and channel configurations do the two CPUs support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel interface, delivering 273.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Processor U301L supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel interface, with no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: Do both processors include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both include integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses the Radeon 8065S, while the Intel Processor U301L uses UHD Graphics 64EU.

Q: What are the thermal design power (TDP) ratings for the two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel Processor U301L has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a 64 MB L3 cache, while the Intel Processor U301L has an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD part has eight times the L3 cache capacity.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 is built on a 4 nm process node at TSMC, while the Intel Processor U301L uses a 10 nm node from Intel’s own foundry. The process node difference is substantial, with the AMD part using a much smaller manufacturing geometry.

The AMD chip belongs to the Gorgon Halo codename family and the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO (Zen 5) generation. The Intel chip belongs to the Raptor Lake codename family and the Intel Processor (Raptor Lake) generation. The architectural lineage differs entirely: Zen 5 versus Raptor Lake.

Cache organization differs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, for an aggregate of 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Processor U301L also provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core but uses 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, with an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD part has a larger total L3 pool, while the Intel part has a slightly larger per-core L2 allocation.

Memory support diverges sharply. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, with a recorded bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s and ECC support enabled. The Intel part uses DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with no ECC support and no bandwidth figure recorded. The AMD part has a wider memory interface and explicitly supports ECC, which the Intel part does not.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Processor U301L provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Both use the same PCIe generation, but the AMD part has twice the lane count.

The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Intel part. Transistor counts are not recorded for either part.

The integrated graphics units differ: the AMD part uses the Radeon 8065S, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 64EU. Both are marked as mobile market segments, and both are in active production.

The multiplier is locked on both processors, meaning neither offers unlocked overclocking.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear performance-class separation between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 offers 16 cores and 32 threads, a 3.10 GHz base clock, a 5.20 GHz boost clock, a 64 MB L3 cache, quad-channel LPDDR5X memory, and a 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth. The Intel Processor U301L offers 5 cores and 6 threads, a 1.20 GHz base clock, a 2.20 GHz boost clock, an 8 MB L3 cache, dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory, and no recorded bandwidth figure.

For workloads that scale with core count, thread count, cache size, or memory bandwidth, the AMD part is the only choice. The AMD chip has more than triple the cores, more than quintuple the threads, eight times the L3 cache, and a memory interface with double the channels. The boost clock advantage is also significant: 5.20 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, a gap of 3.00 GHz.

The Intel part offers a much lower TDP: 15 watts versus 55 watts. That is the only category where the Intel chip leads. For systems constrained by thermal or power budgets, the Intel part may fit where the AMD part cannot. Its socket is Intel Socket 1700, whereas the AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, so platform compatibility is entirely different.

The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $107. No launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part. Both parts are locked, both are mobile segments, both are active production, and both use Gen 4 PCIe, though the AMD part has 16 lanes versus 8 lanes.

The recorded data shows no benchmark scores for either processor, no head-to-head benchmark results, and no nearest rivals. The percentile versus all CPUs is 50 for both, with an average benchmark score of 0 for both. Without benchmark measurements, the verdict rests entirely on the specification differences.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 is positioned for high-throughput mobile computing: many cores, high clocks, wide memory, and a large cache. The Intel Processor U301L is positioned for low-power mobile computing: few cores, low clocks, narrow memory, and a small cache. The choice depends on whether the workload favors parallel throughput or minimal power draw.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 | Intel Processor U301L |

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

| Cores | 16 | 5 |

| Threads | 32 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 1.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Gorgon Halo | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO (Zen 5) | Intel Processor (Raptor Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 273.1 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8065S | UHD Graphics 64EU |

| Release Date | 2026-05-19 | 2024-04-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $107 |

| Part Number | 100-000002124 | SRPKFQ5CW |

The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core for both. Both parts have locked multipliers, both are mobile segments, both are active production, and both use Gen 4 PCIe. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, while the Intel part has a launch MSRP of $107.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and the Intel Processor U301L. The wins counter shows 0 for both parts, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. No average benchmark scores exist for either processor, and no nearest rivals are listed for either.

Without measured benchmark data, the comparison relies on the recorded specification fields. The core count difference is the largest single gap: 16 cores versus 5 cores, a difference of 11 cores. The thread count difference is 32 threads versus 6 threads, a difference of 26 threads. These are the most direct indicators of parallel workload capacity.

The clock speed differences are also notable. The base clock gap is 3.10 GHz minus 1.20 GHz, which is 1.90 GHz. The boost clock gap is 5.20 GHz minus 2.20 GHz, which is 3.00 GHz. The AMD part has a higher frequency at both idle and load states.

The cache hierarchy favors the AMD part in L3 capacity: 64 MB versus 8 MB, an eightfold difference. The Intel part has a larger L2 allocation per core: 1.25 MB versus 1 MB, a 0.25 MB difference per core, but the AMD part has more cores to benefit from its L2 configuration.

Memory bandwidth favors the AMD part by a wide margin. The AMD part records 273.1 GB/s over quad-channel LPDDR5X, while the Intel part records no bandwidth figure and uses dual-channel DDR4/DDR5. The channel count doubles from dual to quad, and the memory type differs entirely.

The TDP difference is the most significant advantage for the Intel part: 15 watts versus 55 watts, a 40-watt gap. This makes the Intel part substantially easier to cool and integrate into low-power designs. The Intel part also has a recorded launch MSRP of $107, while the AMD part has no recorded price.

The PCIe lane count favors the AMD part: 16 lanes versus 8 lanes, double the connectivity for external devices. Both use Gen 4, so per-lane bandwidth is equal, but the AMD part has more total lanes.

The release dates differ by more than two years. The Intel Processor U301L was released on 2024-04-07, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 was released on 2026-05-19. The AMD part is the newer design by a wide margin.

The process node difference is 4 nm versus 10 nm. The AMD part is manufactured on a smaller node, which typically correlates with higher transistor density and lower power per transistor, though no transistor counts are recorded to confirm density.

The die size for the AMD part is recorded as 2x 70.6 mm², indicating a multi-die design. No die size is recorded for the Intel part.

The integrated graphics differ in naming and likely capability: Radeon 8065S versus UHD Graphics 64EU. No benchmark scores for either GPU are recorded, so no quantitative comparison is possible.

The memory bus width difference is quad-channel versus dual-channel. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. This makes the AMD part suitable for error-sensitive workloads.

The socket difference means these parts are not interchangeable in any system. AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel Socket 1700 are entirely incompatible platforms.

Neither part has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not a distinguishing factor. Both parts are in active production and target the mobile market segment.

The recorded data shows no measured performance results, so all conclusions about performance are drawn from the specification differences. The AMD part leads in cores, threads, clocks, cache, memory bandwidth, PCIe lanes, and newer process node. The Intel part leads in TDP and has a recorded launch MSRP.