AMD Ryzen 7 8700F vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear split between the two processors, with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 winning 20 of the 23 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8700F takes 3 wins. The most dramatic victory for the 8700F comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 3761 against the HX 370's 2018, a 86.4% advantage. That is a massive gap in single-threaded rendering performance. The 8700F also wins Cinebench R15 single-core (378 vs 306.5, a 23.3% lead) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (26646 vs 21761, a 22.4% lead). These three wins are all in Cinebench workloads, which suggests the desktop chip has a strong showing in that specific rendering suite.

The HX 370 dominates almost everything else. In 3DMark, it wins all six tests, with the largest margin in max threads (9725 vs 7861, a 19.2% lead) and 16 threads (9365 vs 7883, a 15.8% lead). The single-thread 3DMark test also goes to the HX 370 (1153 vs 1008, a 12.6% lead), which contrasts sharply with the Cinebench R23 single-core result. The two chips clearly respond differently to different benchmark engines. In Geekbench, the HX 370 leads both multi-core (15242 vs 13523, an 11.3% margin) and single-core (2407 vs 2290, a 4.9% margin).

PassMark results are overwhelmingly in favor of the HX 370. The biggest deltas appear in find prime numbers (126 vs 98, a 22.2% lead), floating point math (76892 vs 62629, an 18.5% lead), and integer math (122933 vs 100371, an 18.4% lead). Data compression shows a 445719 vs 378160 result, a 15.2% lead. Even the narrowest PassMark gap, data encryption (22252 vs 22117, only 0.6%), favors the HX 370. The overall average benchmark score reflects this: the HX 370 sits at 37904 against the 8700F's 30746. The HX 370 also holds a higher percentile rank, 86 vs 82.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different generations and target different market segments. The Ryzen 7 8700F is a desktop part in the 8000 series, built on Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a mobile part from the Ryzen AI 300 generation, using Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture with the Strix Point codename. Both use a 4 nm process from TSMC, but the die sizes differ: the 8700F measures 178 mm² with 25,000 million transistors, while the HX 370 is larger at 233 mm² with no transistor count recorded.

Core counts differ significantly. The 8700F has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are very different: 4.10 GHz for the 8700F versus 2.00 GHz for the HX 370. Boost clocks are closer, with the 8700F at 5.00 GHz and the HX 370 slightly higher at 5.10 GHz. The 8700F has a 65 W TDP, the HX 370 a 28 W TDP. The socket types reflect their segments: AM5 for the desktop chip, FP8 for the mobile chip.

Cache layouts differ in L1 and L3. The 8700F uses 64 KB L1 per core and 16 MB L3 shared, while the HX 370 uses 80 KB L1 per core and 16 MB L3. Both have 1 MB L2 per core. Memory support is broader on the HX 370, which accepts DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the 8700F only lists DDR5. Both are dual-channel, but memory bandwidth favors the HX 370 at 89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.

PCIe lanes favor the 8700F: Gen 4 with 20 lanes versus Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the HX 370. The HX 370 includes integrated graphics (Radeon 890M), while the 8700F has no integrated graphics. The 8700F has an unlocked multiplier and a launch MSRP of $270; the HX 370 has no recorded launch MSRP and a locked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8700F has 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F wins with a score of 26646 against the HX 370's 21761, a 22.4% advantage.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 boosts to 5.10 GHz, slightly higher than the 8700F's 5.00 GHz. The 8700F has a much higher base clock at 4.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Q: Does the 8700F include integrated graphics?

A: No, the 8700F has no integrated graphics. The HX 370 includes a Radeon 890M iGPU.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The HX 370 provides 89.6 GB/s, while the 8700F provides 83.2 GB/s. Both are dual-channel DDR5, but the HX 370 also supports LPDDR5X.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The HX 370 has an average benchmark score of 37904, compared to the 8700F's 30746. The HX 370 also ranks at the 86th percentile versus the 82nd for the 8700F.

The Verdict

The data points to one processor being the stronger all-around performer: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370. It wins 20 of 23 head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score (37904 vs 30746), and ranks higher in percentile (86 vs 82). Its 12-core, 24-thread configuration with Zen 5 architecture delivers broad multi-threaded superiority across 3DMark, Geekbench, and PassMark workloads. The 8700F is not without merit, but its wins are concentrated in Cinebench: R23 multi-core, R23 single-core, and R15 single-core. The R23 single-core result (3761 vs 2018, an 86.4% lead) is striking, and the R23 multi-core win (26646 vs 21761, a 22.4% lead) shows the desktop chip can outpace the mobile part in that specific suite.

For users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering, the 8700F has a demonstrated edge. For essentially every other measured workload, the HX 370 delivers higher scores. The HX 370 also offers a lower TDP (28 W vs 65 W), integrated graphics, and LPDDR5X memory support, though it lacks the unlocked multiplier and the higher PCIe lane count of the 8700F. The choice depends on workload emphasis: Cinebench-heavy tasks favor the 8700F, while general compute, compression, encryption, math, and physics workloads favor the HX 370.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen 7 8700F | AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 12 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 4.10 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 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 |

| Generation | Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 (Phoenix)) | Ryzen AI 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 233 mm² |

| 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 Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

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

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

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier Unlocked | true | false |

| Launch MSRP | $270 | null |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core (26646 vs 21761), Cinebench R23 single-core (3761 vs 2018), and Cinebench R15 single-core (378 vs 306.5). Those three results mark it as the stronger option for Cinebench-based rendering tasks, particularly single-threaded Cinebench where its 86.4% lead is the largest delta in the entire comparison. Its higher base clock (4.10 GHz) and 65 W TDP likely contribute to this desktop-oriented strength.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins everywhere else. In 3DMark, it takes all six tests, with leads from 3.3% (4 threads) to 19.2% (max threads). Geekbench multi-core and single-core both favor it. PassMark shows consistent wins across compression (15.2% lead), encryption (0.6% lead), extended instructions (10% lead), prime numbers (22.2% lead), floating point (18.5% lead), integer math (18.4% lead), multithread (12.1% lead), physics (17.4% lead), random string sorting (6.8% lead), and single-thread (2.5% lead). The HX 370 also has the higher average benchmark score (37904 vs 30746) and the higher percentile (86 vs 82).

For users focused on Cinebench rendering, the 8700F is the pick. For all other measured workloads, from 3DMark to PassMark to Geekbench, the HX 370 is the stronger performer in the recorded data.