AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 across all 15 shared benchmark tests. The Ryzen 7 250 does not secure a single win in the head-to-head comparison. The largest margin appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the HX 375 scores 122 against 73, a 40.2% advantage. This workload, which stresses integer iteration and branch prediction, heavily favors the newer architecture.

Cinebench results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the HX 375 delivers 21812 points versus 14676 for the Ryzen 7 250, a 32.7% gap. The single-core R23 test shows a narrower but still clear 13.7% lead for the HX 375, with scores of 1988 and 1715 respectively. Cinebench R15 multi-core reinforces the multi-threaded story: 3334 against 2302, a 31% difference. The R15 single-core test shows a 10.6% edge for the HX 375, 301 versus 269.

PassMark integer math shows the HX 375 at 121754 against 91565, a 24.8% margin. Floating point math widens to 29.1%, with 75153 against 53285. Extended instructions, a proxy for AVX and other SIMD workloads, shows a 26.2% advantage for the HX 375 at 29269 versus 21613. Data compression favors the HX 375 by 25.7%, scoring 404918 against 300708. Data encryption shows a smaller 15.1% lead, 20802 versus 17661.

The PassMark multi-thread test gives the HX 375 a 23.8% edge, 32916 against 25089. Physics simulation, another heavily threaded workload, shows a 36.9% gap in favor of the HX 375, 1819 versus 1147. Random string sorting, which measures memory access patterns and pointer chasing, favors the HX 375 by 19.5%, 44552 against 35861.

The single-thread PassMark test is the closest comparison in the entire dataset. The HX 375 scores 3867 against 3678 for the Ryzen 7 250, a margin of only 4.9%. This indicates that while the HX 375 wins every test, its per-core advantage is modest relative to the multi-core gains. The multi-core wins are driven primarily by the additional cores and threads, not by a massive single-core clock advantage. Both processors share the same 5.10 GHz boost clock, so the single-thread delta reflects architectural efficiency rather than frequency.

The average benchmark score places the Ryzen 7 250 at 38221, while the HX 375 reaches 46030. The percentile ranking also differs: the Ryzen 7 250 sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the HX 375 ranks at the 89th percentile. The Ryzen 7 250's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at 38194 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i5-13600HX at 38261 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i5-14490F at 38149 (0.2% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H at 38312 (0.2% higher). The HX 375's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 at 46062 (0.1% higher), the AMD EPYC 4364P at 45970 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i9-13900HX at 46098 (0.1% higher), and the AMD EPYC 7303 at 45960 (0.2% lower).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different AMD generations. The Ryzen 7 250 uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Point codename. The HX 375's generation entry describes a hybrid configuration of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, though the core count data shows a flat 12 cores and 24 threads. The Ryzen 7 250 provides 8 cores and 16 threads.

Both chips are built on the same 4 nm process node at TSMC. The die sizes differ: the Ryzen 7 250 measures 178 mm², while the HX 375 is larger at 233 mm². Transistor counts are listed only for the Ryzen 7 250 at 25,000 million; the HX 375 entry does not include a transistor figure.

Cache layouts differ in the L1 and L2 tiers. The Ryzen 7 250 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. The larger L1 per core on the HX 375 contributes to its single-thread efficiency gains in the benchmark data.

Memory support differs. The Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 only, while the HX 375 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, and both list the same memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe lane counts differ. The Ryzen 7 250 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the HX 375 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the Ryzen 7 250 pairs with the Radeon 780M, while the HX 375 uses the Radeon 890M.

Base clocks differ substantially. The Ryzen 7 250 runs at 3.30 GHz base, while the HX 375 runs at 2.00 GHz base. Both share the same 5.10 GHz boost clock. The lower base clock on the HX 375 suggests a different power distribution strategy across its 12 cores, yet the multi-core benchmark results still favor it heavily.

Both processors use the same AMD Socket FP8 and carry a 28 W TDP. Both are listed as mobile market segment parts with active production status. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates differ: the Ryzen 7 250 launched on 2025-01-05, while the HX 375 launched on 2024-06-30.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a one-sided comparison. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins all 15 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 4.9% in PassMark single-thread to 40.2% in find prime numbers. The Ryzen 7 250 does not win a single recorded benchmark.

The HX 375's advantage is largest in multi-core and compute-heavy workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 32.7% lead, physics shows 36.9%, and find prime numbers shows 40.2%. These gains align with the 12-core, 24-thread configuration versus the 8-core, 16-thread configuration of the Ryzen 7 250. The single-thread gap is much smaller, at 4.9% in PassMark, 13.7% in Cinebench R23, and 10.6% in Cinebench R15.

The Ryzen 7 250 remains a capable mobile processor in absolute terms. Its average benchmark score of 38221 places it above the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database. But the HX 375 sits higher at the 89th percentile with an average score of 46030.

The architecture split explains most of the difference. The HX 375 uses Zen 5 with a larger L1 cache per core, while the Ryzen 7 250 uses Zen 4. The additional four cores and eight threads provide the bulk of the multi-threaded advantage. The shared 16 MB L3 cache means the HX 375 does not gain a capacity advantage at the last level, but the per-core L1 increase helps single-thread performance.

The data does not show any workload category where the Ryzen 7 250 pulls ahead. Every measured test, from integer math to data compression to physics, favors the HX 375. The closest contest is single-thread performance, where the HX 375 leads by less than 5%, but it still leads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 250 | AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 12 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Strix Point |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 233 mm² |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not listed |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 16 MB |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | Radeon 890M |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2024-06-30 |

The two chips share the same socket, TDP, process node, foundry, memory bus width, memory bandwidth, ECC support status, market segment, production status, and multiplier lock state. The differences above are the complete set of divergent fields in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How much faster is the HX 375 in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The HX 375 scores 21812 against 14676 for the Ryzen 7 250, a 32.7% advantage.

Q: Do the two processors have the same boost clock?

A: Yes, both list a 5.10 GHz boost clock. The base clocks differ: 3.30 GHz for the Ryzen 7 250 and 2.00 GHz for the HX 375.

Q: What is the closest benchmark result between the two?

A: The PassMark single-thread test shows the smallest margin, with the HX 375 at 3867 and the Ryzen 7 250 at 3678, a 4.9% difference.

Q: Do both processors use the same socket?

A: Yes, both use AMD Socket FP8 and carry a 28 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has a larger L1 cache per core?

A: The HX 375 has 80 KB of L1 per core. The Ryzen 7 250 has 64 KB of L1 per core. Both have 1 MB of L2 per core and 16 MB of L3.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins in every recorded benchmark category. There is no test in the head-to-head dataset where the Ryzen 7 250 takes the lead. The use-case split therefore rests on the magnitude of the HX 375's advantage rather than on any reversal of positions.

For heavily threaded workloads, the HX 375 is the clear choice. Cinebench R23 multi-core (32.7% ahead), Cinebench R15 multi-core (31% ahead), PassMark physics (36.9% ahead), and PassMark find prime numbers (40.2% ahead) all show large margins. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration drives these results. Rendering, scientific computing, and server-style integer workloads would benefit most from this gap.

For single-threaded tasks, the HX 375 still wins but by a smaller margin. PassMark single-thread shows only 4.9% separation, Cinebench R23 single-core shows 13.7%, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 10.6%. Applications that depend primarily on one or two threads would see a noticeable but not overwhelming improvement with the HX 375.

Memory-sensitive workloads also favor the HX 375. Data compression runs 25.7% faster, random string sorting runs 19.5% faster, and data encryption runs 15.1% faster. These tests exercise cache hierarchy and memory bandwidth, both of which benefit from the Zen 5 architecture's larger L1 cache.

The Ryzen 7 250's position in the database is not weak in isolation. It sits at the 86th percentile with an average score of 38221, close to the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (38194) and the Intel Core i5-13600HX (38261). But against the HX 375, it is outmatched in every measured dimension. The HX 375, at the 89th percentile, competes near the Intel Core i9-13900HX (46098) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 (46062) in average score.

The data supports a simple conclusion: choose the HX 375 for any workload where multi-threaded performance matters, and choose the HX 375 even for single-threaded tasks, since it maintains a lead there as well. The Ryzen 7 250 offers a lower base clock, fewer cores, and an older architecture, all reflected in its consistent deficit across the benchmark suite.