AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495
AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Select video card 1
Select video card 2

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385. Specifications

User rating
star star star star star
Released
—
AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495

Family illustration.

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495
Released
—
User rating
star star star star star
AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Family illustration.

AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

What's the best choice AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 or AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385? Which processor is faster?

Compare the available specifications of these models.

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a base frequency of 3.1 GHz. 16 / 32 CPU Cores / Threads. Stated TDP / base power 55 W.

AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has a base frequency of 3.6 GHz. 8 / 16 CPU Cores / Threads. Stated TDP / base power 55 W.

Differences

  • More number of cores

    8 more cores

    16 left arrow 8
  • Higher turbo clock speed

    Around 4% higher specified turbo frequency

    5.2 GHz left arrow 5 GHz

Positions in all rankings

Common positions AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 CPU in popular benchmarks, for comparison with other models.

No data
  • Higher clock speed

    Around 16% better clock speed

    3.6 GHz left arrow 3.1 GHz

Positions in all rankings

Common positions AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 CPU in popular benchmarks, for comparison with other models.

No data

Specifications

Technical data
AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495
AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
CPU family and group

Background information about the processors being compared, series, generation and market segment.

  • Family
    Ryzen PRO left arrow Ryzen PRO
  • Form Factor
    Laptops / Desktops left arrow Laptops / Desktops
  • Segment
    Mobile left arrow Mobile
  • Series
    Ryzen AI Max PRO 400 Series left arrow Ryzen AI Max PRO 300 Series
CPU Technical specs

Core counts, threads, cache and clock modes describe the CPU configuration. Performance depends on the workload and comparable measured results.

  • Base Frequency
    3.1 GHz left arrow 3.6 GHz
  • CPU Cores
    16 left arrow 8
  • CPU Threads
    32 left arrow 16
  • Max. Boost Clock
    5.2 GHz left arrow 5 GHz
IGPU

Internal Graphics does not affect the performance of the CPU, performs the work of the graphics card in its absence or on mobile devices.

  • GPU Frequency
    3000 MHz left arrow 2800 MHz
  • GPU name
    Radeon 8065S Graphics left arrow Radeon 8050S Graphics
  • Graphics Cores
    40 left arrow 32
Memory specs & PCI

Types, channel quantity of RAM supported by AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495. Depending on the motherboards, higher or lower memory frequencies may be supported.

  • Memory type
    256-bit LPDDR5x left arrow 256-bit LPDDR5x
  • PCIe
    PCIe 4.0 left arrow PCIe 4.0
Thermal Management

Compare the TDP requirements of TDP AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 Power specifications describe different manufacturer limits. TDP, base power and maximum turbo power are separate values; they do not establish measured system consumption.

  • Configurable TDP
    45-120 W left arrow 45-120 W
  • Default TDP
    55 W left arrow 55 W
  • Maximum Operating Temperature
    100 °C left arrow 100 °C
Technologies and extensions

Architecture, interfaces, additional instructions supported by AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 and AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, virtual machine technologies and process technology.

  • Codename
    Gorgon Halo left arrow Strix Halo
  • L2-Cache
    16 MB left arrow 8 MB
  • L3-Cache
    64 MB left arrow 32 MB
  • Official source
    https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen-pro/ai-max-pro-400-series/amd-ryzen-ai-max-plus-pro-495.html left arrow https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen-pro/ai-max-pro-300-series/amd-ryzen-ai-max-pro-385.html
  • Technology
    TSMC 4nm FinFET left arrow TSMC 4nm FinFET
  • Verified on
    2026-09-30 left arrow 2026-09-30
  • Socket
    - left arrow FP11

Benchmarks

Performance tests CPUs

No comparable benchmark results are available yet. Specifications alone do not determine which model is faster.

These are saved results from the earlier catalog. Measurement dates and test configurations were not recorded. Models with no comparable results are omitted.

Latest comparisons