AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core 9 270H Comparison

The Intel Core 9 270H and AMD Ryzen 7 250 are both high-end mobile processors that land in the same performance tier, sitting at the 86th percentile among all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are remarkably close—the Intel part scores 38,335, while the AMD part scores 38,221, a gap of only 0.3% in Intel's favor. However, that overall parity masks a very lopsided head-to-head record: the Core 9 270H wins 14 of the 15 direct comparisons, with the Ryzen 7 250 taking only one. The data shows that these are not interchangeable chips; each has distinct strengths that suit different workloads, and the choice comes down to whether you prioritize raw compute power or specific efficiency-oriented tasks.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 9 270H is the clear winner for anyone whose workload is dominated by multi-threaded processing, single-thread responsiveness, or floating-point math. It leads in every Cinebench test, with its biggest margins in the R23 multi-core (22.6% ahead) and R15 single-core (29% ahead) benchmarks. For rendering, video encoding, and general productivity, the Core 9 270H is the stronger pick, and its 14 cores and 20 threads give it a structural advantage over the Ryzen 7 250's 8 cores and 16 threads.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the better choice only in one specific scenario: extended instruction workloads. It wins the PassMark extended instructions test by 7.1%, which indicates an edge in SIMD-heavy code that leverages modern instruction sets. If your software uses AVX-512 or similar extensions heavily, the Ryzen 7 250 is worth considering, despite losing everywhere else. Its 28W TDP also makes it the lower-power option, which matters for thin-and-light laptops where thermals and battery life are priorities, though the benchmark data does not directly quantify that efficiency advantage.

For most users, the Core 9 270H is the safer recommendation. It wins the two most common Cinebench tests by double-digit margins, and its PassMark single-thread score of 3,944 versus 3,678 (7.2% ahead) means snappier everyday responsiveness. The Ryzen 7 250 only makes sense for a niche user who specifically needs extended instruction performance or values the lower 28W TDP over the Intel's 45W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core 9 270H uses Raptor Lake architecture built on Intel's 10 nm process, with a Raptor Lake-H codename from the Core 9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. It packs 14 cores and 20 threads, which indicates a hybrid layout of performance and efficiency cores, though the FACT PACK does not specify the exact split. Its base clock is 2.70 GHz, boosting up to 5.80 GHz, and it has a 45W TDP.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses Zen 4 architecture built on TSMC's 4 nm process, with the Hawk Point codename from the Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 Hawk Point) generation. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its TDP is 28W, significantly lower than Intel's 45W. The AMD chip is manufactured on a more advanced node, and the FACT PACK confirms it has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while Intel's transistor count and die size are not listed.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has more cache at every level, which likely contributes to its benchmark dominance. Memory support also differs—Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while AMD supports only DDR5. Both are dual-channel, but AMD's memory bandwidth is listed at 89.6 GB/s, while Intel's is not specified.

The integrated graphics differ as well. Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while AMD uses Radeon 780M. The FACT PACK does not include iGPU benchmarks, so any comparison there would be speculative. PCIe support also varies: Intel offers Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes, while AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. Both chips are locked (multiplier unlocked: false), so overclocking is not an option for either.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core 9 270H scores 18,000 versus the AMD Ryzen 7 250's 14,676, giving Intel a 22.6% lead in this heavily multi-threaded workload.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 250 win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark extended instructions test, scoring 21,613 against Intel's 20,079, a 7.1% advantage that points to better SIMD and instruction-set-extension performance.

Q: How do their single-core scores compare?

A: Intel is ahead in every single-core test. In Cinebench R15, Intel scores 347 versus AMD's 269, a 29% gap; in R23, Intel scores 2,040 versus 1,715, a 19% gap; and in PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 3,944 versus 3,678, a 7.2% gap.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between them?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark physics, where Intel scores 1,966 versus AMD's 1,147, a 71.4% lead. The second-largest is PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel wins by 53.4% (112 versus 73).

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance class overall?

A: Yes, both sit at the 86th percentile among all CPUs. Intel's average benchmark score is 38,335, and AMD's is 38,221, a difference of just 0.3%, placing them as near-identical in aggregate performance.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: Intel has 14 cores and 20 threads, while AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel's additional cores directly contribute to its multi-core benchmark wins, particularly the 22.6% Cinebench R23 lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every core specification. Intel has 14 cores and 20 threads, versus AMD's 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel's base clock is 2.70 GHz, lower than AMD's 3.30 GHz, but Intel's boost clock is 5.80 GHz, higher than AMD's 5.10 GHz. Intel's TDP is 45W, while AMD's is 28W, making AMD the lower-power option.

The process node and foundry differ completely: Intel uses 10 nm at its own foundry, while AMD uses 4 nm at TSMC. AMD's transistor count is 25,000 million on a 178 mm² die, while Intel's figures are not provided. Cache sizes favor Intel across the board: 80 KB L1 per core versus 64 KB, 2 MB L2 per core versus 1 MB, and 24 MB shared L3 versus 16 MB.

Memory support is another differentiator. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, AMD only DDR5; both are dual-channel, but AMD lists 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth while Intel does not specify. PCIe lanes differ: Intel has Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes, AMD has Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are Iris Xe 96EU on Intel versus Radeon 780M on AMD. Sockets are incompatible by design: Intel BGA 1744 versus AMD Socket FP8. Neither supports ECC memory, neither is unlocked for overclocking, and both are mobile-market parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results paint a definitive picture. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 2,464 against AMD's 2,302, a 7% win. The single-core R15 test is far more lopsided: Intel scores 347 versus 269, a 29% advantage that shows Intel's per-core strength. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives Intel 18,000 versus 14,676, a 22.6% margin, and R23 single-core gives Intel 2,040 versus 1,715, a 19% lead. These are not marginal wins; they represent a clear generational and architectural gap.

The PassMark suite shows a similar pattern, with Intel winning 11 of 12 tests. The largest victory is in physics, where Intel scores 1,966 versus 1,147, a massive 71.4% delta. Floating-point math also favors Intel heavily: 70,640 versus 53,285, a 32.6% lead. Find prime numbers shows Intel at 112 versus 73, a 53.4% win. Multi-thread performance gives Intel 28,764 versus 25,089, a 14.6% advantage. Integer math is closer at 97,654 versus 91,565, a 6.6% lead, and single-thread is also modest at 3,944 versus 3,678, a 7.2% win.

Data compression and encryption both go to Intel, with 11% and 9.7% margins respectively. Random string sorting is the narrowest Intel win at 2.8% (36,867 versus 35,861). The only AMD victory in the entire head-to-head is extended instructions, where AMD scores 21,613 versus Intel's 20,079, a 7.1% edge. That single win is notable but does not offset Intel's dominance elsewhere—Intel wins the overall head-to-head by a count of 14 to 1.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 270H wins in every category that matters for mainstream performance. For multi-threaded rendering and video work, the 22.6% Cinebench R23 lead is decisive. For single-thread responsiveness, the 29% R15 and 19% R23 single-core margins mean faster application launches and snappier UI. For scientific and engineering workloads, the 32.6% floating-point math win and 53.4% prime number finding advantage show a clear edge in numerical computation. Even for data-heavy tasks like compression and encryption, Intel leads by 11% and 9.7% respectively. The physics benchmark, with its 71.4% margin, suggests Intel is far better suited for simulation and physics-based workloads.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins exactly one benchmark: extended instructions, with a 7.1% lead (21,613 versus 20,079). This points to a specific use case—software that heavily uses newer SIMD instruction sets like AVX-512. For developers or researchers running such code, the Ryzen 7 250 offers measurable advantage. Additionally, its 28W TDP versus Intel's 45W TDP makes it the better fit for a thin-and-light laptop design, even though the benchmark data does not show a performance efficiency metric. That lower power draw also implies less heat generation, which can sustain longer boost durations in thermally constrained chassis, though the FACT PACK does not measure this directly.

For anyone else, the Core 9 270H is the obvious choice. It wins 14 of 15 benchmarks, with margins from 2.8% to 71.4%, and its higher core count (14 versus 8) and larger caches (24 MB L3 versus 16 MB) give it structural advantages that the AMD chip cannot overcome outside of its single specialty. The only buyer who should pick the Ryzen 7 250 is one who knows they need extended instruction performance and values that over the Intel's broad dominance.