AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in the head-to-head comparisons: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 takes 20 of 21 benchmark wins, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F secures a single victory. The magnitude of the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370's lead varies dramatically across workloads, ranging from a narrow 3.4% margin to a dominant 39.9% advantage.

The most lopsided results appear in heavily multithreaded tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 scores 3409.5 versus 2101 for the Ryzen 5 8400F, a 38.4% gap. PassMark floating point math shows a similar pattern, with the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 76892 against 46217, a 39.9% difference. Integer math follows closely at 122933 versus 74021, a 39.8% lead. These results align with the core count difference between the two processors.

The 3DMark suite reinforces this trend. In the 16-thread test, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 scores 9365, which is 35% ahead of the 8400F's 6091. The max-thread test shows a 36.6% gap (9725 versus 6165). Even at 8 threads, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 leads by 24.6% (6992 versus 5275). The margin narrows to 10.3% at 4 threads (3970 versus 3563) and to 14% at 2 threads (2179 versus 1874).

Single-thread performance tells a more nuanced story. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins the 3DMark single-thread test by 17.5% (1153 versus 951) and the PassMark single-thread test by 7.2% (3973 versus 3685). In Cinebench R15 single-core, the lead shrinks to just 3.4% (306.5 versus 296). However, the Ryzen 5 8400F claims its only victory in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 2943 against 2018, a 45.8% advantage. This outlier result stands apart from all other single-thread measurements.

Data compression and encryption workloads show substantial leads for the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370. PassMark data compression scores 445719 versus 288158, a 35.3% difference. Encryption shows a 25.2% gap (22252 versus 16646). Extended instructions follow at 29.9% (31653 versus 22175). Prime number finding and physics tests show 29.4% and 29.2% leads respectively. Random string sorting rounds out the PassMark suite with a 29% difference (48723 versus 34604).

The average benchmark scores in the database place the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37904, which corresponds to the 86th percentile among all CPUs. The Ryzen 5 8400F averages 25005, sitting at the 77th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Ryzen 5 8400F include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F at 24964 (0.2% difference) and the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24911 (0.4% difference). For the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, the nearest competitors include the Intel Core i9-14901E at 37911 (0% difference) and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X at 37943 (0.1% ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different market segments. The Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename, part of the 8000 series for desktop systems. It fits the AMD Socket AM5 and uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Point codename, belonging to the Ryzen AI 300 series for mobile systems. It uses the AMD Socket FP8 and also employs a 4 nm TSMC process.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The 8400F provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while the HX 370 doubles that to 12 cores and 24 threads. The HX 370's generation is listed as "Zen 5 / Zen 5c," indicating a hybrid core arrangement, whereas the 8400F uses a uniform Zen 4 core setup. Clock speeds show the HX 370 with a 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost, compared to the 8400F's 4.20 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies differ in the L1 and L2 portions. The 8400F has 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. The HX 370 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. Both share 16 MB of L3, though the HX 370 lists it simply as 16 MB while the 8400F specifies 16 MB shared. Die size differs at 178 mm² for the 8400F versus 233 mm² for the HX 370. Transistor count is recorded only for the 8400F at 25,000 million.

Integrated graphics present a major distinction. The 8400F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A), while the HX 370 includes the Radeon 890M. Memory support also diverges: the 8400F supports DDR5 only, while the HX 370 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth favors the HX 370 at 89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s for the 8400F. PCIe lanes differ as well, with the 8400F offering 20 lanes and the HX 370 offering 16 lanes, both at Gen 4.

The multiplier is unlocked on the 8400F but locked on the HX 370. Power specifications show a 65 W TDP for the desktop part and 28 W for the mobile part. The 8400F launched with an MSRP of $170, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the HX 370. Release dates place the 8400F in March 2024 and the HX 370 in June 2024.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 includes Radeon 890M integrated graphics. The Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the single-thread performance comparison?

A: The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 leads in most single-thread tests: 3DMark single-thread (1153 versus 951), PassMark single-thread (3973 versus 3685), and Cinebench R15 single-core (306.5 versus 296). The Ryzen 5 8400F wins Cinebench R23 single-core by a large margin (2943 versus 2018).

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 boosts to 5.10 GHz. The Ryzen 5 8400F boosts to 4.70 GHz.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 only. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has an unlocked multiplier. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 8400F | AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Phoenix | Strix Point |

| Die size | 178 mm² | 233 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe lanes | 20 | 16 |

| Integrated graphics | N/A | Radeon 890M |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | $170 | Not recorded |

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 dominates across nearly every measured workload. Its 12-core, 24-thread configuration delivers consistent advantages in multithreaded tasks such as data compression (35.3% ahead), floating point math (39.9% ahead), and integer math (39.8% ahead). The 3DMark 16-thread and max-thread tests show 35% and 36.6% leads respectively. For users running heavily parallel workloads, content creation tasks, or CPU-bound simulations, the HX 370's core count provides a substantial edge.

The HX 370 also leads in most single-thread scenarios, including 3DMark single-thread (17.5% ahead) and PassMark single-thread (7.2% ahead). Its higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz compared to 4.70 GHz contributes to this advantage. The Cinebench R15 single-core margin of 3.4% indicates that the architectural improvements in Zen 5 provide a modest but measurable single-thread uplift over Zen 4.

The Ryzen 5 8400F's single win in Cinebench R23 single-core (45.8% ahead) stands as an isolated data point that contradicts the other single-thread results. The database records this as the only benchmark where the 8400F outperforms the HX 370. Beyond that result, the 8400F offers specific advantages in platform characteristics: it uses the AM5 desktop socket with an unlocked multiplier, supports 20 PCIe lanes versus 16, and has a lower 65 W TDP compared to the HX 370's 28 W. The 8400F also has a recorded launch MSRP of $170.

For desktop builders with existing AM5 motherboards, the 8400F provides a compatible upgrade path without requiring a new platform. Its unlocked multiplier allows manual overclocking, which the locked HX 370 does not permit. The lack of integrated graphics means a discrete GPU is mandatory, but this aligns with typical desktop configurations.

The Verdict

The benchmark data consistently favors the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 across the vast majority of tests. With 20 wins out of 21 head-to-head comparisons, the HX 370 delivers superior performance in multithreaded workloads, data-intensive tasks, and most single-threaded measurements. Its 12 cores and 24 threads provide a structural advantage that clock speed alone cannot overcome. The 86th percentile ranking among all CPUs, compared to the 77th percentile for the 8400F, reflects this overall performance gap.

The Ryzen 5 8400F occupies a different role. As a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP, it targets systems where the AM5 socket and unlocked multiplier matter more than raw thread count. Its 6 cores and 12 threads still deliver respectable performance, and the recorded average benchmark score of 25005 places it in the same range as the Ryzen 5 7500F (24964) and the Intel Core i7-13620H (24911). For workloads that rely on fewer threads, the 8400F's 4.70 GHz boost clock keeps it competitive, though the HX 370's 5.10 GHz boost generally wins those tests.

The Cinebench R23 single-core result for the 8400F (2943 versus 2018, a 45.8% lead) is the exception that prevents a complete sweep. This single data point suggests that in a specific rendering workload, the 8400F can outperform the HX 370. Users prioritizing that particular benchmark may find the 8400F adequate, but the broader dataset indicates the HX 370 is the stronger processor overall.

The choice between these two processors hinges on platform and workload. The HX 370 suits mobile systems where its 28 W TDP and integrated Radeon 890M graphics reduce the need for a separate GPU. The 8400F suits desktop builds where the AM5 socket, unlocked multiplier, and 20 PCIe lanes offer flexibility for enthusiasts. The data does not support a general recommendation for the 8400F over the HX 370 in raw performance terms, but the desktop-specific features and lower TDP give it a distinct role in the product stack.