AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is lopsided in favor of the mobile processor. Out of 15 shared tests, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins 14, while the Ryzen 5 8400F takes a single victory. The largest margins come in compute-heavy workloads where the HX 375's extra cores and threads dominate.

The biggest single win for the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 121,754 against 74,021 for the 8400F, a 39.2% advantage. Floating point math shows a similar story: the HX 375 scores 75,153 versus 46,217, a 38.5% lead. Cinebench R15 multicore delivers the most dramatic gap, with the HX 375 scoring 3,334 against 2,101, a 37% advantage. These three results confirm that heavily threaded workloads heavily favor the 12-core, 24-thread HX 375.

The gap narrows considerably in mixed and lighter workloads. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the HX 375 scores 21,812 versus 20,851 for the 8400F, a much smaller 4.4% lead. PassMark multithread shows a 25.9% advantage for the HX 375 (32,916 against 24,389), while data compression lands at 404,918 versus 288,158, a 28.8% edge. Extended instructions favor the HX 375 by 24.2% (29,269 against 22,175), and data encryption shows a 20% lead (20,802 against 16,646).

The Ryzen 5 8400F's sole win is notable because it comes in Cinebench R23 single-core. The desktop chip scores 2,943 against 1,988 for the HX 375, a 48% advantage. That is the largest delta in either direction across the entire head-to-head set. The 8400F also stays competitive in the lighter single-thread tests: PassMark single-thread shows the HX 375 ahead by just 4.7% (3,867 against 3,685), and Cinebench R15 single-core shows the HX 375 ahead by only 1.7% (301 against 296).

Other PassMark subtests follow the multi-core pattern. Physics favors the HX 375 by 26.8% (1,819 against 1,332). Random string sorting shows a 22.3% edge for the HX 375 (44,552 against 34,604). Prime number finding lands at 122 versus 89, a 27% advantage. Across all shared tests, the data indicates a processor that is consistently faster in parallel work, with the desktop part retaining a clear single-core strength in one specific renderer.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and target different markets. The Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Phoenix codename, part of the 8000 series, and is built for desktop with an AMD Socket AM5. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses Zen 5 under the Strix Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI 300 generation, and targets mobile with an AMD Socket FP8. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process, so the manufacturing node is identical. The die size differs: the 8400F measures 178 mm², while the HX 375 is larger at 233 mm². The 8400F lists 25,000 million transistors; the database does not record a transistor count for the HX 375.

Core counts diverge sharply. The 8400F provides 6 cores and 12 threads. The HX 375 doubles that to 12 cores and 24 threads, using a hybrid arrangement of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Cache layouts also differ. The 8400F has 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. The HX 375 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, also with 16 MB of L3. Neither processor includes 3D V-Cache.

Memory support separates the two as well. The 8400F supports DDR5 only, through a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The HX 375 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a higher recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory. PCIe connectivity favors the desktop chip: the 8400F offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the HX 375 offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics mark another clear divide. The 8400F has no integrated GPU, with the database listing N/A. The HX 375 includes a Radeon 890M iGPU, making it a complete mobile package. Clock behavior reflects the different design goals. The 8400F has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The HX 375 has a much lower base of 2.00 GHz but a higher boost of 5.10 GHz. The unlocked multiplier on the 8400F allows overclocking, while the HX 375 is locked. The 8400F carries a 65 W TDP, while the HX 375 is rated at 28 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins in nearly every measured category, but the types of workloads where it excels are clear. Rendering, math, encryption, compression, and general multithreaded throughput all favor the mobile chip. The 37% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore, the 39.2% lead in integer math, and the 38.5% lead in floating point math place it firmly ahead for video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific computation, and any task that scales across many threads. The 20% edge in data encryption and the 24.2% edge in extended instructions also make it the stronger choice for security-related and AVX-heavy workloads. Its 12 cores and 24 threads give it a structural advantage in parallel execution that no clock-speed difference can offset.

The Ryzen 5 8400F wins in Cinebench R23 single-core with a 48% margin, a result that stands out because it is the only shared test where the desktop chip leads. This suggests the 8400F has an advantage in lightly threaded rendering tasks that rely on a single core, at least in that specific benchmark. Elsewhere in single-thread tests, the two are close: the HX 375 leads by 4.7% in PassMark single-thread and by 1.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core. The 8400F also benefits from its unlocked multiplier, which allows manual overclocking, and from its desktop socket, which typically allows more robust cooling and power delivery. Its higher base clock of 4.20 GHz versus 2.00 GHz also helps in latency-sensitive tasks that do not boost well.

The use-case split comes down to thread scaling. For content creation, data processing, and heavily parallel compute, the HX 375 delivers consistently higher throughput. For single-core-sensitive applications, the 8400F holds its own and wins outright in one major renderer. The 28 W TDP of the HX 375 also means it delivers that performance in a mobile power envelope, while the 65 W 8400F is a desktop part with more thermal headroom.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 4.20 GHz for the 8400F and 2.00 GHz for the HX 375. Boost clocks are 4.70 GHz for the 8400F and 5.10 GHz for the HX 375. TDP is 65 W for the desktop chip and 28 W for the mobile chip. The 8400F uses AMD Socket AM5, while the HX 375 uses AMD Socket FP8. Architecture is Zen 4 (Phoenix) versus Zen 5 (Strix Point). The 8400F is part of the 8000 series; the HX 375 belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation with a Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid arrangement.

Cache differs in L1 size: 64 KB per core for the 8400F versus 80 KB per core for the HX 375. L2 is 1 MB per core for both, and L3 is 16 MB shared for both. Memory support is DDR5 only for the 8400F, while the HX 375 adds LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s for the 8400F and 89.6 GB/s for the HX 375. PCIe lanes are 20 for the 8400F and 16 for the HX 375, both Gen 4. Integrated graphics: the 8400F has none, while the HX 375 includes Radeon 890M. The 8400F has an unlocked multiplier; the HX 375 is locked. Die size is 178 mm² for the 8400F and 233 mm² for the HX 375. The 8400F lists 25,000 million transistors; no count is recorded for the HX 375. The 8400F launched with a $170 launch MSRP. The database records no launch MSRP for the HX 375.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 21,812 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20,851. The HX 375 leads by 4.4%.

Q: Which chip wins in Cinebench R23 single-core?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F wins, scoring 2,943 against 1,988 for the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, a 48% advantage.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Neither the Ryzen 5 8400F nor the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 supports ECC memory.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor include?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 includes a Radeon 890M integrated GPU.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor provide?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F provides 83.2 GB/s, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 provides 89.6 GB/s. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: What is the process node for both chips?

A: Both the Ryzen 5 8400F and the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 are fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process.