AMD Ryzen AI Halo review: AMD builds a DGX Spark of its own

If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em

AMD Ryzen AI Halo
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Given its performance deficit versus Nvidia's GB10 platform, the next question for the AI Halo is whether AMD's included software and library of documentation adds substantial value versus other Strix Halo boxes that ship with nothing more than an OS.

AMD Ryzen AI Halo

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

I started my exploration of AMD's preinstalled software and playbooks with Lemonade, a heavily AMD-backed and AMD-optimized sort of software Swiss army knife for AI inference that makes it easy to play with a range of models, inference engines, and modalities, all in one unified interface.

While I didn't dig too deep into its capabilities, I was able to quickly combine Qwen 3.6-35B-A3B with the llama.cpp backed and start chatting with it, all with performance similar to what we saw in our directed testing with llama.cpp. This is the kind of smooth, straightforward experience that you want from a product like this. But Lemonade is available for a wide range of AMD systems, not just AI Halo, so you don’t have to buy one of these boxes if you want to try it out.

AMD Ryzen AI Halo

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Other included apps have a few more wrinkles. When you first boot the Linux AI Halo we tested, the system launches a centralized management interface called the Ryzen AI Developer Center (AIDC for short) that aims to put key system information, settings, and software updates in one easy-to-access spot.

The AIDC app exposes some handy settings that Strix Halo users will want at their fingertips. Most notably, it lets you adjust how much of the AI Halo's 128GB memory pool is split between the CPU and GPU graphically instead of through the command line.

While we didn't have time to test their impact on performance, you can also select from three power profiles to balance noise, power consumption, and performance. And if the built-in LED light bar on this box is annoying you for any reason, you can turn it off through this interface.

Outside of those functions, the AI Developer Center has some good ideas that don't feel fully baked. For example, model management is one of the most common tasks when I'm setting up or mucking around on a local AI box. The AIDC app will show you what models you have downloaded across the system for use with AMD's pre-installed apps. But you can't open or otherwise reveal their containing folders so that you can add to or manage the data within them directly.

That's a pain, because if you do want to extend the usefulness of preinstalled apps like ComfyUI by adding new models in support of different workflows, that task is harder than it should be. As far as I can tell, the preinstalled ComfyUI lives in a Podman container (presumably for ease of updating), so its traditional directory structure (which would normally end up under /home//) is obscured.

ComfyUI can be configured to look for additional model directories beyond its defaults using a separate .yaml file. But with AMD’s configuration, those directories live in /var/cache/, which on the AI Halo’s Debian image is owned by root, not the user, so you can't just drop new models into those alternate directories at will without some chmod work that I didn't want to mess with for fear of breaking something.

And this directory location isn't documented in the related ComfyUI playbook that AMD provides (but is discussed in the overall user guide for the system).

AMD says the preinstalled software and models on the AI Halo are only meant to support its playbooks, and that users are free to go about installing and configuring the same apps to their own taste. But to me, the next logical step for learning after running through those playbooks is extending the functionality of those workflows, and if the process for doing so is neither straightforward nor transferable to the natively installed version of the application, then is the knowledge being conferred even useful?

For another example of some minor documentation hassles, the preinstalled version of vLLM on this system has a launch script that provides a lightweight wrapper that presents status information and checks the health of the vLLM instance. AMD encourages running different models with vLLM by changing the model string in this script, but the path to it is again not documented anywhere in the accompanying playbook. So I had to go digging. I eventually found it in /usr/bin/ by dumb luck, but this is the kind of very basic information that documentation exists to chronicle.

AMD Ryzen AI Halo

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

AMD also provides a direct competitor to the useful Nvidia Sync remote access app called AMD Sync. Sync allows you to connect to the AI Halo using SSH, and you can get versions of it for Windows and Linux alike (but not for macOS, so far, an option that Nvidia supports.)

The basic idea of AMD Sync is that you can run workloads that need the resources of the AI Halo on that system while working remotely on your preferred device. For just a couple examples, you can get a terminal session, run a remote instance of VS Code, or work in JupyterLab, all powered by the AI Halo. Check out AMD’s playbook for more examples of what Sync can do.

Overall, the pre-installed software on the AI Halo will get you started if you have no prior local AI experience and are working from AMD's playbooks to learn the basics, but I feel like the configuration decisions that AMD made to include those apps could be more flexible and better documented.

From the playbooks I tried, I also think AMD could stand to have a few more rounds of QA to ensure that these docs fully cover everything beginners need to know in order to get the most out of the platform.

TOPICS
Jeffrey Kampman
Senior Analyst, Graphics

As the Senior Analyst, Graphics at Tom's Hardware, Jeff Kampman covers everything that has to do with graphics cards, gaming performance, and more. From integrated graphics processors to discrete graphics cards to the hyperscale installations powering our AI future, if it's got a GPU in it, Jeff is on it. 

  • Neilbob
    Me when trying to understand the meaning and purpose of such devices (and A.I. in general).

    LKCi0gDF_d8
    AMD just blowing bubbles, right along with N****a. I expect Intel will be next up with a meaningless overpriced plastic box.
    Reply
  • Pierce2623
    Software compatibility is a negative compared to an ARM based machine?? Sure guys…. Also it seems only benchmarking some AI models and nothing else is purposely catering to Nvidia. AI hadn’t even started booming when we first heard about Strix Halo. So it clearly wasn’t designed solely for AI regardless of how they’ve advertised during the AI boom. If the AI boom hadn’t happened Strix Halo would be getting sold with 32GB for $1000. Knowing all that context, it seems weird to only test a few AI models.
    Reply
  • Bigshrimp
    What are these devices for the price? I know this is a rhetorical question, but it's still funny that this was released. Costly for what it is...
    Reply
  • suryasans
    AI writing by Google Gemini is much smarter and fairer than you. https://www.google.com/search?q=amd+ryzen+ai+halo+ai+developer+pc+vs+nvidia+gb10+power+consumption&sca_esv=4b04a474141781e0&rlz=1C1CHBF_enID1038ID1038&sxsrf=APpeQnsquHCA-jw-qqP98xNQhxFXMchnpg%3A1783360176978&ei=sOpLaqiwO_SVseMP0ty0qAw&biw=1600&bih=731&oq=amd+ryzen+ai+halo+ai+developer+pc+vs+nvidia+gb10+power+co&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiOWFtZCByeXplbiBhaSBoYWxvIGFpIGRldmVsb3BlciBwYyB2cyBudmlkaWEgZ2IxMCBwb3dlciBjbyoCCAAyBRAhGKABSOhOUKIJWIk8cAF4AJABAJgBhwGgAasFqgEDNy4yuAEDyAEA-AEBmAIKoALIBcICCBAAGO8FGLADwgILEAAYgAQYogQYsAPCAgUQABjvBcICCBAAGIAEGKIEmAMAiAYBkAYFkgcDOC4yoAedE7IHAzcuMrgHxQXCBwM1LjXIBwyACAE&sclient=gws-wiz-serp
    Reply
  • maviz
    This is a completely useless piece of trash on a piece of shit ecosystem.
    I had the Ryzen with 32 GB and i will tell you the drivers are *USELESS*.
    Even above that, the compatibility matrix is laughable...i had to sell both my CPU and my 6700 XT...and now i have a 5060 that is leaps and bounds faster and "just works"....and another 5070 TI which was not comparable to begin with. This box is hopelessly slow for any real AI work, priced like shit, performing like shit, i dont even know how they dare present this as any sort of evolution. You spend a few hundred more and get something 3 yrs ahead in the ecossystem and also MANY times faster...its laughable at best.
    Reply
  • JamesJones44
    Pierce2623 said:
    Software compatibility is a negative compared to an ARM based machine?? Sure guys…. Also it seems only benchmarking some AI models and nothing else is purposely catering to Nvidia. AI hadn’t even started booming when we first heard about Strix Halo. So it clearly wasn’t designed solely for AI regardless of how they’ve advertised during the AI boom. If the AI boom hadn’t happened Strix Halo would be getting sold with 32GB for $1000. Knowing all that context, it seems weird to only test a few AI models.
    AI training and inference is all done on Linux and largely with ARM based servers believe it or not (they cost less and the CPU isn't all that relevant for AI workloads). The fact that x86 lags in this department isn't a surprise.
    Reply
  • dva852
    Pierce2623 said:
    Software compatibility is a negative compared to an ARM based machine??
    AI is a CUDA world, at least for now. ROCm support is still spotty. x86/ARM is irrelevant.

    AMD is leaning on open-source angle as it tries to breach CUDA moat. It also places higher focus on Windows platform, gunning for Windows devs as they move to AI. Nvidia is doing same with RTX Spark. Windows itself is moving to ARM. Lots of moving pieces.
    Pierce2623 said:
    Also it seems only benchmarking some AI models and nothing else is purposely catering to Nvidia.
    You don't buy a $4K box to play games on an iGPU. Strix Halo was already considered "overpriced" at $2K--which admittedly was before-DC era. But repurposed for AI, it has gained new relevance, and higher valuation. IMO, not $4K high, but "higher."

    At $4K vs DGX Spark's $4.7K, Strix AI is underwhelming. DGX has more compute, faster interconnect, better ecosystem. But the price is a bit irrelevant. It's a reference device, with official software (Win & Lin) stack, and most importantly, official support. It's meant to establish AMD's AI ecosystem. Think of it as placeholder for future iterations.

    Even though Spark has faster compute, both it and Strix Halo are saddled with same memory bandwidth bottleneck. It's why the models used in AMD's benchmark (as well as THW ones) are either mixture-of-expert (read: low active parameter count), or small dense models. Even a midsized dense model would've brought both to a crawl. That's the real takeaway, that LPDDR5X is a makeshift solution to the AI bandwidth problem, and will need better solutions going forward.

    Gorgon Halo also on LPDDR5X. Medusa Halo gets LPDDR6/X, in either late '27 or '28.

    I looked on YT and "Ryzen AI Halo reviews" are popping up, so apparently today is "Halo AI's" official coming out party. Underlining the point is AMD's YT blurb, with Jack Huynh's mug trying reeeeaally hard to crack a smile. More happy thoughts, Jack.

    For a more informative Ryzen Halo AI review, as well as providing a wider perspective,

    Gz62bniDkpgView: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz62bniDkpg
    Pierce2623 said:
    AI hadn’t even started booming when we first heard about Strix Halo. So it clearly wasn’t designed solely for AI regardless of how they’ve advertised during the AI boom.
    After a forgettable foray in some high-end laptops, Strix Halo popped up in Shenzhen mini-PCs, and was immediatedly co-opted for AI use. The review below was 9 months ago, and gives a good perpective on Ryzen AI's WIP state at that point in time. Note also the $1.8K price.

    prIUKAbHlj8View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prIUKAbHlj8
    Reply
  • salgado18
    Neilbob said:
    Me when trying to understand the meaning and purpose of such devices (and A.I. in general).

    LKCi0gDF_d8
    AMD just blowing bubbles, right along with N****a. I expect Intel will be next up with a meaningless overpriced plastic box.
    For coding, for example: you set up a coding agent platform, like Claude Code, Codex or OpenCode. Then, you ask it to implement something or fix a bug. The platform will orchestrate AI agents and local tools to understand, plan, execute and test the task. That's the use case.

    Why such a box? Cloud-hosted AI models cost a lot of money if charged per token, and monthly subs have limits and are subject to price increases or vanish entirely. To run locally, even most gaming PCs struggle with such a heavy task that is running AI, let alone many of them in parallel. And setting up a central server with good hardware is crazy expensive and a big maintenance task.

    Enter these boxes: you pu one on your desk, work on it or connected to it, and the agent platform uses its hardware to work, instead of cloud models. So your work is entirely local and contained to one PC.

    I believe this is the future of PCs, and we're just seeing the first prototypes and proof-of-concepts. It's terrible value for gaming, regular working, media editing etc. But for local AI usage, it's a very tempting format.
    Reply
  • salgado18
    dva852 said:
    "For coding, for example: you set up a coding agent platform... and then it's immediately you spin up a containerized runtime, pipe your LLM through a RAG vector store, scaffold the MCP tool schema, YAML the CI/CD hooks, kubectl apply to the Kubernetes cluster--

    FTFY o_O
    What? I tested Claude Code and OpenCode, and it's just install -> set api key -> start prompting. Even with Ollama it's quick and easy.
    Reply
  • JamesJones44
    The crazy part is this is starting to look like somewhat of a bargain. A year ago you could have gotten an 128GB M4 Max Mac Studio with double the memory bandwidth of the max+ 395 for $3700, now to get that level of performance you are in the 5.5+k range with GB 10 or Apple Silicon. Performance for local model operations is probably good enough for low to medium intensity tasks.
    Reply