Home > CPU Comparison > Core Ultra X9 388H or Ryzen AI Max+ 495: what's better?

Intel Core Ultra X9 388H vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495

75 out of 100
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H
VS
88 out of 100
AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495
Intel Core Ultra X9 388H
AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495

We compared two 16-core laptop CPUs: the 2.1 GHz Intel Core Ultra X9 388H against the 3.1 GHz AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495. On this page, you'll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.

  1. Review
  2. Differences
  3. Performance
  4. Specs
  5. Comments

Review

General overview and comparison of the processors
Single-Core Performance
Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks
Multi-Core Performance
Measure performance when all cores are involved
Power Efficiency
The efficiency score of power consumption
Integrated Graphics
iGPU capabilities for gaming and 3D-intensive tasks
NanoReview Final Score
Choose your main usage scenario to recalculate the Final Score and see which CPU suits your needs.
🔌 Usage Scenario:

Key Differences

What are the key differences between 495 and 388H
Advantages of Intel Core Ultra X9 388H
  • More modern manufacturing process – 2 versus 4 nanometers
  • Newer PCI Express version – 5.0
Advantages of AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495
  • Newer - released 8 months later
  • Has 46 MB larger L3 cache size, helping fully utilize a high-end GPU in gaming
  • Supports up to 192 GB LPDDR5X-8533 RAM
  • Supports quad-channel memory
  • More powerful Radeon 8065S integrated graphics: 15.4 vs 7.7 TFLOPS
  • Around 102.4 GB/s (67%) higher theoretical memory bandwidth
  • 2% higher Turbo Boost frequency (5.2 GHz vs 5.1 GHz)

Test in Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs across various tasks
CPU:
Core Ultra X9 388H
vs
Ryzen AI Max+ 495

Cinebench

Reputable cross-platform benchmark for high-performance processors
Cinebench 2024 (Single)
Cinebench 2024 (Multi)
Cinebench 2026 (Single) 539 -
Cinebench 2026 (Multi) 5375 -
Cinebench Scores (#86th place)
Submit your benchmark results

GeekBench v6

The new version of this benchmark emulates common operations often used in real-world apps
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
File compression 1490 MB/sec -
Clang compilation 141.1 Klines/sec -
HTML 5 Browser 477.4 pages/sec -
PDF Renderer 539.5 Mpixels/sec -
Text processing 323.1 pages/sec -
Background blur 61.5 images/sec -
Photo processing 177.3 images/sec -
Ray tracing 28.4 Mpixels/sec -
Sources: GeekBench [1]

PassMark

Synthetic test that focuses on raw computational performance for low-level functions
Passmark CPU (Single-Core)
Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)
Integer math 91.2 GOps/sec -
Floating point math 112.9 GOps/sec -
Find prime numbers 357M Primes/sec -
Random string sorting 43.7M Strings/sec -
Data encryption 28.4 GBytes/sec -
Data compression 360.2 MBytes/sec -
Physics 3207 Frames/sec -
Extended instructions 29.7B Matrices/sec -
Sources: PassMark [3], [4] – 60 samples

Blender

3D rendering test that measures CPU performance in 3D modeling tasks (uses all cores)
Blender CPU

Performance Per Watt

Shows the score you get per each watt of PL1 TDP
Cinebench 2024 / Watt 53.7 PPW -
Geekbench 6 Multi / Watt 701.8 PPW 200.8 PPW
Passmark CPU Mark / Watt 1468.8 PPW 468.7 PPW
Blender / Watt 11.89 PPW -
These are rough calculations, as most CPUs surpass PL1 TDP wattage even in multicore workloads.

Specifications

Full technical specification of Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495

General

Vendor Intel Amd
Released January 5, 2026 September 5, 2026
Type Laptop Laptop
Instruction Set x86-64 x86-64
Codename Panther Lake Zen 5 (Gorgon Point)
Model number 388H 495
Integrated GPU Arc B390 Radeon 8065S
Rival Equivalent - AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 -
Intel CPU rating (#28th place)

CPU

Performance Cores
P-Cores 4 16
P-Threads 4 32
Base Frequency (P) 2.1 GHz 3.1 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency (P) 5.1 GHz 5.2 GHz
Efficient Cores
E-Cores 12 -
E-Threads 12 -
Base Frequency (E) 1.6 GHz -
Turbo Boost Frequency (E) 4 GHz -
Total
Total Cores 16 16
Total Threads 16 32
Bus Frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 21x 31x
L1 Cache 192K (per core) 80K (per core)
L2 Cache 3MB (per core) 1MB (per core)
L3 Cache 18MB (shared) 64MB (shared)
Unlocked Multiplier No No

Package

Fabrication Process 2 nm 4 nm
TDP (PL1) 15-25 W (configurable) 45-120 W (configurable)
Max. Boost TDP (PL2) 80 W -
Socket FCBGA2540 FP11
Peak Temperature 100°C 100°C

iGPU

Integrated Graphics Intel Arc B390 Radeon 8065S
GPU Base Clock 300 MHz 1295 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 2500 MHz 3000 MHz
Shading Units 1536 2560
TMUs 48 160
ROPs 24 64
Execution Units 12 40
TGP 30 W 55 W
iGPU FLOPS
Core Ultra X9 388H
7.7 TFLOPS
Ryzen AI Max+ 495 +100%
15.4 TFLOPS
More info: Radeon 8065S compared to Arc B390

Memory Support

Memory Types - LPDDR5X-9600 - LPDDR5X-8533
Max. Memory Size 96 GB 192 GB
Memory Channels 2 4
Max. Memory Bandwidth 153.6 GB/s 256 GB/s
ECC Support No Yes

Misc

Official Site Intel Core Ultra X9 388H official page AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 official page
PCI Express Version 5.0 4.0
PCI Express Lanes 12 16

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
Total votes: < 1

Competitors

1. Intel Core Ultra X9 388H vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H
2. Intel Core Ultra X9 388H vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H (1)
3. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 vs Apple M6 (12-Core)
4. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395
5. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H
6. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 vs Apple M5 Max (40-сore GPU)
7. AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H
Compare other CPUs (460+)

Comments

So which CPU will you choose: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 495 or Intel Core Ultra X9 388H?
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!
EnglishРусский