SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 + AMD Radeon 760M

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

Build Configuration

Select your components

PROCESSOR (CPU)

▼

GRAPHICS CARD (GPU)

▼

90 Score

Top 10% Ranking

90 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 10% of systems. Capable of 4K Ultra gaming and advanced rendering.

4K 60+ FPSVR ReadyRay Tracing

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

98%

GPU

83%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392

90,541 Benchmark Score

Top 2% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon 760M

6,019 Benchmark Score

Top 17% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

Market Position

How your build compares to others

Budget

0-30

Mid-Range

30-60

High-End

60-85

Enthusiast

85-100

Your Build

Game Performance Benchmarks

Real-world 4K FPS in popular titles

View All Games →

Performance Insights

Tips to maximize your system

Optimal Performance

Your system is in the top tier. You can run any modern game at maximum settings.

4K Gaming Ready

Consider a 4K 144Hz monitor to fully utilize your hardware capabilities.

Compatible Games See what you can play Compare CPUs Find upgrades Compare GPUs Find upgrades

Performance Tiers Explained

90-100

Ultimate

4K Ultra gaming, VR ready, ray tracing enabled, professional workloads

4K 60+ FPS VR Ready

70-89

High-End

1440p Ultra or 4K High settings, excellent for modern AAA titles

1440p Ultra 4K High

50-69

Mid-Range

1080p Ultra or 1440p Medium, great value for most gamers

1080p Ultra 1440p Med

30-49

Entry Level

1080p Medium settings, suitable for eSports and older titles

1080p Med eSports

0-29

Legacy

Basic gaming, older titles, consider upgrading for modern games

720p-1080p Low Older Games

# AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 + AMD Radeon 760M — Hardware Analyst Review

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 pairs a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 5 processor with a Radeon 760M integrated GPU in a laptop-class build. This combination targets the 66th percentile of all CPU+GPU pairings, driven almost entirely by a processor that outperforms 96% of all CPUs while the integrated graphics sit at just the 35th percentile of all GPUs. The split between a top-tier compute engine and an entry-level graphics solution defines the character of this machine: exceptional for CPU-bound productivity and compute workloads, but firmly limited for modern gaming and graphics-intensive tasks. The following analysis draws exclusively from the benchmark data and specifications provided.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built on the Zen 5 architecture using TSMC's 4 nm process, with a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm². It contains 12 cores and 24 threads, operating at a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a mobile-market processor (segment "Mobile") on the AMD Socket FP11 platform, part of the Strix Halo codename family.

The benchmark results show a processor that excels in sustained multithreaded work. The PassMark multithread score of 45,231 places it in rarefied company, with an average benchmark score of 90,541 that beats 96% of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 654 (average score 90,717, delta -0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (average score 91,199, delta -0.7%), and the Intel Xeon w7-2575X (average score 88,172, delta +2.7%). The data shows the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sitting within 1% of the top two rivals and roughly 3% ahead of the Xeon w7-2575X — a tight grouping that indicates this processor belongs in the upper echelon of available CPUs.

Breaking down the individual workloads, the integer math score of 152,414 and floating-point math score of 99,548 demonstrate strong arithmetic throughput that would benefit computationally intensive tasks like scientific simulations, financial modeling, and complex data analysis. The data compression score of 554,760 and random string sorting score of 59,487 suggest robust memory and cache handling, which is consistent with the 64 MB shared L3 and quad-channel LPDDR5X memory support offering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The single-thread score of 3,927 is respectable for a mobile processor, and the extended instructions score of 45,666 indicates solid SIMD performance for vectorized workloads.

The TDP is rated at 55 W, which for 12 cores on a 4 nm node represents a power envelope that allows sustained high-frequency operation in a laptop chassis. The processor supports ECC memory, a feature typically found in workstation-class hardware, which reinforces its positioning for professional and reliability-sensitive applications. The data encryption score of 27,784 and find prime numbers score of 320 round out a profile that is consistently above average across every measured metric.

FAQ

Q: How does the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 compare to its closest CPU rivals?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90,541, which is 0.2% below the Intel Xeon 654 (90,717) and 0.7% below the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (91,199). It sits 2.7% above the Intel Xeon w7-2575X (88,172) and 3% above the Intel Xeon 6736P (87,864).

Q: What is the processor's performance percentile?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms 96% of all CPUs in the benchmark database, placing it in the top 4% of processors tested.

Q: What memory configuration does this CPU support?

A: The processor supports LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration, offering 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It also supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) of the CPU?

A: The TDP is rated at 55 W, which is modest for a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 5 processor.

Q: Does the CPU include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 includes integrated graphics in the form of the Radeon 8060S.

Q: What is the socket and platform?

A: It uses AMD Socket FP11 with a PCIe Gen 4 interface providing 16 lanes from the CPU.

Q: Is the CPU multiplier unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, the multiplier is locked (multiplierUnlocked: false).

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's PassMark multithread score of 45,231 and average benchmark score of 90,541 place it at the 96th percentile of all CPUs, outperforming 96% of the field. The nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX, scores 91,199 on average — a delta of only -0.7%, meaning the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 trails that flagship mobile part by less than one percent. Against the Intel Xeon 654 (90,717) the delta is -0.2%, and against the Xeon w7-2575X (88,172) it leads by 2.7%. This is a processor that trades blows with server-class Xeon parts while maintaining a 55 W TDP.

The GPU side tells a different story. The Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6,019, placing it at the 35th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6400 with an average score of 6,001 (delta +0.3%), followed by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6,000 (delta +0.3%), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5,996 (delta +0.4%). The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 400, while the Geekbench OpenCL score is 20,255 and Vulkan is 30,336. The PassMark G3D score of 5,310 and GPU compute score of 2,840 further characterize this as an entry-level integrated GPU.

The combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing is 66, meaning the combination outperforms 66% of all builds in the database. However, this is a case where the whole is significantly less than the sum of its parts: the CPU is in the 96th percentile while the GPU is in the 35th, creating a massive capability gap. The average benchmark scores — 90,541 for CPU and 6,019 for GPU — represent a ratio of roughly 15:1, which is indicative of a system built around processor performance with graphics as an afterthought.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark data shows an extreme imbalance between CPU and GPU capabilities. The processor's 96th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 35th percentile ranking means that in any workload that engages both components, the GPU will be the limiting factor. For gaming, this means the Radeon 760M will cap frame rates far below what the CPU could theoretically support; the CPU's single-thread score of 3,927 and multithread score of 45,231 are more than sufficient for any modern game engine, but the GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5,310 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 400 will constrain visual fidelity and resolution.

In CPU-bound workloads such as data compression (554,760), integer math (152,414), and floating-point math (99,548), the processor operates at full potential with no bottleneck from the GPU. These tasks do not rely on graphics hardware, so the system delivers performance appropriate to its 96th percentile CPU ranking. Conversely, in GPU-bound workloads like 3D rendering, video encoding, or any DirectX 12 Ultimate application, the system will perform at roughly the 35th percentile level, because the GPU's PassMark DirectX 12 score is only 25.

The FPS scaling picture, while not measured for this exact combination, can be inferred from the benchmark scores. The GPU's texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s, combined with 512 shading units and 16 ROPs, indicate a part that can handle 1080p gaming at low-to-medium settings in older titles, but will struggle with modern games at higher detail levels. The CPU's contribution to gaming performance is effectively neutralized by the GPU bottleneck — a system with this processor and a discrete GPU would perform dramatically better, but with the integrated 760M, the gaming ceiling is set by the graphics solution.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This build is not suitable for high-refresh gaming. The Radeon 760M's 35th percentile GPU ranking and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 400 indicate frame rates far below what a 144 Hz or 240 Hz display would need. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking is irrelevant here because the GPU cannot feed frames fast enough.

Streaming: The CPU's 24 threads and 55 W TDP provide ample headroom for software encoding while gaming, given the GPU's limited resources. The multithread score of 45,231 and extended instructions score of 45,666 suggest the processor can handle both game logic and encoding streams, but the GPU will still limit game quality settings.

Video editing: CPU-based rendering and effects will perform well, with the 152,414 integer math score and 99,548 floating-point score accelerating timeline operations. However, GPU-accelerated effects and export will be limited by the 760M's compute score of 2,840, making real-time previews of complex effects challenging.

3D rendering: CPU rendering with the 12 cores and 24 threads will deliver excellent results — the 99,548 floating-point score is strong for ray tracing calculations. GPU rendering with OpenCL (20,255) or Vulkan (30,336) will be significantly slower than any discrete solution.

Software development: This is a strong fit. The 45,231 multithread score accelerates compilation, the 64 MB L3 cache benefits large codebases, and the 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth reduces link-time bottlenecks. The 4 nm process and 55 W TDP mean sustained builds without thermal throttling in a laptop chassis.

Student and office work: The CPU is overkill for documents and spreadsheets, but the 3,927 single-thread score ensures snappy responsiveness in all productivity applications. The 35th percentile GPU is irrelevant for office tasks, making this a capable if underutilized machine for academic work.

Who Should Build It

The target user for this build is someone who prioritizes CPU performance above all else and does not require discrete graphics. Software developers will benefit from the 96th percentile CPU ranking, with 12 cores and 24 threads accelerating builds and the 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth handling large datasets. Small business workstations running data analysis, financial modeling, or scientific computing will find the 55 W TDP and ECC memory support appealing, especially given the processor's 2.7% lead over the Intel Xeon w7-2575X in average benchmark score.

Content creators working primarily in CPU-bound tasks — such as audio production, code compilation, or document processing — will see excellent performance. However, gamers at any resolution above 720p with modern titles will be disappointed; the GPU's 35th percentile ranking and 5,310 PassMark G3D score place it at entry-level integrated graphics capability. Students and office workers will experience outstanding responsiveness for everyday tasks, but they are paying for far more CPU capability than those workloads require. The build makes sense for professionals who need a laptop with workstation-class CPU throughput and accept integrated graphics as a secondary consideration.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around AMD Socket FP11, which is a mobile socket — upgrades are limited to what is available on this specific platform. The processor supports LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is already a high-bandwidth setup. PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU provides adequate connectivity for NVMe storage and external GPU enclosures, though the integrated Radeon 760M uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The CPU's TDP is 55 W, and the GPU's TDP is 15 W, suggesting a combined thermal budget of roughly 70 W for core components. No suggested PSU is listed, which is typical for an IGP (integrated graphics) laptop solution. The memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s is a strong foundation for future memory-intensive workloads, and the 64 MB L3 cache reduces reliance on system memory bandwidth for many tasks.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be adding an external GPU via the PCIe Gen 4 lanes, which would address the primary limitation (the 35th percentile integrated graphics) without replacing the CPU. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking means it has years of headroom before it becomes a bottleneck in any CPU-bound workload. However, the locked multiplier prevents overclocking, and the mobile socket limits processor replacement options.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build (buildClass: "laptop") pairing the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 CPU with the AMD Radeon 760M integrated GPU. The combined percentile of 66 means it outperforms 66% of all builds in the benchmark database, but this figure is misleading — the CPU alone sits at the 96th percentile while the GPU sits at the 35th. The pairRankByFps is null, and no measured FPS data exists for this combination, indicating that the database does not have frame rate validation for this specific pairing.

The overall tier is defined by the CPU: this is a top-tier compute platform with entry-level graphics. The average benchmark score of 90,541 for the CPU places it among Xeon-class processors, while the GPU's average score of 6,019 places it alongside discrete GPUs from several generations ago (e.g., the GTX 770M scores 6,000). The build class of laptop and 55 W CPU TDP suggest a thin-and-light or workstation-class notebook where CPU performance is the primary design goal and graphics are a secondary consideration.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. It features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, with 8 ray tracing cores. The base clock is 800 MHz with a boost clock of 2599 MHz. Memory is system-shared with no dedicated VRAM; bandwidth is system-dependent, tied to the LPDDR5X quad-channel setup.

The benchmark results place this GPU at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6,019. The nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6400 at 6,001 (+0.3%), meaning this integrated GPU performs within a rounding error of a discrete entry-level card. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 400, which is low even by integrated standards. The PassMark DirectX scores are telling: DirectX 9 at 65, DirectX 11 at 52, DirectX 12 at 25, and DirectX 10 at 19 — these are sub-100 scores that indicate very basic rasterization capability.

The compute performance is somewhat better: Geekbench OpenCL scores 20,255 and Vulkan scores 30,336, while PassMark GPU compute scores 2,840. This suggests the GPU can handle compute workloads better than pure graphics rendering, though still at entry-level levels. The FP32 throughput is 5.323 TFLOPS, and the pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s. The API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so feature support is modern even if raw performance is limited.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination — the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 paired with the Radeon 760M. All FPS discussion below is therefore estimated from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximate.

Based on the GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5,310 and its 35th percentile ranking, this system would deliver playable frame rates only at 720p or 1080p with low-to-medium settings in older or less demanding titles. The DirectX 11 score of 52 and DirectX 12 score of 25 suggest that modern games using these APIs will run at reduced settings and resolutions. The 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is comparable to entry-level discrete GPUs, but the system-shared memory bandwidth creates additional bottlenecks.

For esports titles like CS:GO or League of Legends, the 3,927 single-thread CPU score would help maintain high frame rates, but the GPU's 512 shading units and 16 ROPs would cap maximum FPS well below competitive 144 Hz thresholds. For AAA titles at 1080p, the GPU would likely struggle to maintain 30 FPS at medium settings, given the DirectX 12 score of 25 relative to even entry-level discrete solutions. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking does not translate into gaming performance because the GPU is the limiting factor in every graphics-bound scenario. Users seeking gaming capability should consider this build's CPU as a foundation for an eGPU setup rather than expecting playable performance from the integrated Radeon 760M alone.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 + AMD Radeon 760M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392

AMD Radeon 760M

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

GPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

4K Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

1440p Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

1080p Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Related Processors

Related Graphics Cards

Compare Your CPU

Compare Your GPU

Related PC Builds

Same CPU with Different GPUs

Same GPU with Different CPUs

Other Popular Builds