Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 vs Core Ultra 7 265HX
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cinebench 2024 single-core | 113 | 125 | -9.6% |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 1,785 | 1,598 | +11.7% |
| Cores | 16 | 20 (8P+12E) | — |
| TDP (base W) | 45 | 45 | — |
- Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 is slower than Core Ultra 7 265HX by 9.6% in single-core and faster by 11.7% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
Verdict: Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 or Core Ultra 7 265HX?
Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 advantages
- Multi-core speed (+10%)
Core Ultra 7 265HX advantages
- Single-core speed (+10%)
Which should you choose?
- Choose the Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 if you render video, compile code or run heavy multitasking.
- Choose the Core Ultra 7 265HX if you mainly game or want snappy everyday responsiveness.
Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 vs Core Ultra 7 265HX: which should you choose?
Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 — 16-core AMD processor scoring 113 single-core and 1785 multi-core in Cinebench 2024, with a 45 W TDP and 64 MB L3 cache.
Core Ultra 7 265HX — 20-core Intel processor (8P+12E) scoring 125 single-core and 1598 multi-core in Cinebench 2024, with a 45 W TDP.
Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 vs Core Ultra 7 265HX: Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 leads in multi-core performance. Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 is slower than Core Ultra 7 265HX by 9.6% in single-core and faster by 11.7% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
Gaming and single-threaded work
Games and everyday responsiveness lean on single-core speed. The Core Ultra 7 265HX leads there with a single-core score of 125 versus 113, so it is the marginally better pick for high-refresh gaming — though at typical resolutions the GPU usually decides frame rates.
Content creation and multitasking
For rendering, compilation, video export and other all-core workloads, the Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 is stronger, posting 1,785 multi-core against 1,598 in Cinebench 2024. Its 16 cores give it real headroom for heavy parallel jobs.
Power and platform
The Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 is the more efficient chip at 45 W versus 45 W, which means less heat, quieter cooling and lower running costs under sustained load.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the processor comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 better than the Core Ultra 7 265HX?
These two are closely matched — the right pick comes down to which specific strengths you value and the price you actually pay. Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 is slower than Core Ultra 7 265HX by 9.6% in single-core and faster by 11.7% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
What is the main difference between the Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 and the Core Ultra 7 265HX?
Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 is slower than Core Ultra 7 265HX by 9.6% in single-core and faster by 11.7% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
Which should I choose?
Choose the Ryzen AI Max+ Pro 395 if you render video, compile code or run heavy multitasking. Choose the Core Ultra 7 265HX if you mainly game or want snappy everyday responsiveness.
Methodology
Processors are compared on Cinebench 2024 single-core and multi-core scores from published leaderboard results, alongside core configuration (performance + efficiency cores), base TDP, L3 cache, PassMark CPU Mark, 1080p gaming scores and street pricing where measured. Cinebench reflects rendering-style workloads; gaming performance depends heavily on the GPU and the specific title, so treat single-core standing as directional. Figures reflect the leaderboard snapshot on the page date.