AMD Ryzen 7 8700F vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a sharp split between these two AMD processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F wins 8 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins 9. The margins, however, are not evenly distributed, and the pattern of wins tells a clear story about each chip's strengths.

The most dramatic result appears in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Ryzen 7 8700F scores 3761 against the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375's 1988, a lead of 89.2%. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. The 8700F also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 25.6%, scoring 378 versus 301. Geekbench single-core follows the same trend: 2290 versus 2084, a 9.9% advantage for the 8700F.

In multi-core workloads, the picture flips. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 takes Cinebench R15 multi-core with 3334 against 2685, a 19.5% deficit for the 8700F. However, the Ryzen 7 8700F counters in Cinebench R23 multi-core with 26646 versus 21812, a 22.2% win. This inconsistency across Cinebench versions is curious. The R23 result suggests the desktop chip sustains its performance better under longer multi-threaded loads, while the R15 result indicates the mobile chip has a burst advantage in shorter tests.

PassMark results favor the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 in most compute-heavy workloads. Integer math goes to the HX 375 by 17.6% (121754 versus 100371). Floating-point math shows a 16.7% edge (75153 versus 62629). Physics simulation favors the HX 375 by 14.6% (1819 versus 1553). Prime number finding shows a 19.7% gap (122 versus 98). Data compression goes to the HX 375 by 6.6% (404918 versus 378160). Extended instructions go to the HX 375 by 2.7% (29269 versus 28474). The multithread aggregate also favors the HX 375 by 6.1% (32916 versus 30893).

The Ryzen 7 8700F holds narrow wins in several other PassMark tests. Data encryption shows a 6.3% edge (22117 versus 20802). Random string sorting goes to the 8700F by 2% (45425 versus 44552). Single-thread results are nearly identical: 3872 versus 3867, a 0.1% margin for the 8700F.

Geekbench multi-core splits the difference. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins 13957 versus 13523, a modest 3.1% advantage. This is far smaller than the core-count difference would suggest.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different platforms. The Ryzen 7 8700F uses Zen 4 architecture under the Phoenix codename, built on a 4 nm TSMC process with a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors. It belongs to the 8000 series and fits the AMD Socket AM5 desktop platform.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses Zen 5 architecture with a hybrid design combining Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores under the Strix Point codename. It also uses a 4 nm TSMC process but has a larger die at 233 mm². Transistor count is not recorded in the database. It uses the AMD Socket FP8 mobile platform and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation.

Core counts differ significantly. The 8700F has 8 cores and 16 threads. The HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads, a 50% increase in core count. Clock speeds tell a different story. The 8700F has a base clock of 4.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The HX 375 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The desktop chip runs much higher base clocks, while the mobile chip has a slightly higher boost ceiling.

Cache layouts differ. The 8700F uses 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The HX 375 uses 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB L3. The larger L1 per core in the HX 375 reflects the Zen 5 core design.

Memory support diverges. The 8700F supports DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The HX 375 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The mobile chip has slightly higher memory bandwidth.

PCIe configurations differ. The 8700F provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The HX 375 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics also differ: the 8700F has none, while the HX 375 includes the Radeon 890M.

The 8700F has an unlocked multiplier, while the HX 375 does not. Power envelopes differ sharply: the 8700F has a 65 W TDP, and the HX 375 has a 28 W TDP. The release dates are close, with the 8700F launching on 2024-03-31 and the HX 375 on 2024-06-30.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 8700F. It wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 89.2%, Cinebench R15 single-core by 25.6%, and Geekbench single-core by 9.9%.

Q: Does the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 win all multi-core tests?

A: No. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 19.5% and Geekbench multi-core by 3.1%, but the Ryzen 7 8700F wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 22.2%.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Ryzen 7 8700F has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Ryzen 7 8700F has a 65 W TDP. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has a 28 W TDP.

Q: Which processor supports LPDDR5X memory?

A: Only the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375. It supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ryzen 7 8700F supports DDR5 only.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Ryzen 7 8700F has no integrated graphics. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 includes the Radeon 890M.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The Ryzen 7 8700F uses Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses Zen 5 with the Strix Point codename. The 8700F belongs to the 8000 series; the HX 375 belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation.

Socket and platform differ: AM5 for the 8700F versus FP8 for the HX 375. Core counts differ at 8 versus 12, and threads at 16 versus 24. Base clocks are 4.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz versus 5.10 GHz. TDP is 65 W versus 28 W.

Die size differs at 178 mm² versus 233 mm². Transistors are recorded only for the 8700F at 25,000 million. L1 cache is 64 KB per core versus 80 KB per core. L3 cache is 16 MB shared for both. Memory support differs: DDR5 for the 8700F versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the HX 375. Memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 20 versus 16, both Gen 4.

The 8700F has no integrated graphics; the HX 375 has the Radeon 890M. The 8700F has an unlocked multiplier; the HX 375 does not. Market segments differ: desktop versus mobile. The 8700F has a launch MSRP of $270; the HX 375 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 8700F dominates in single-core workloads across every benchmark suite. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3761 crushes the HX 375's 1988. It also wins Geekbench single-core and both PassMark single-thread tests, though the PassMark margin is negligible at 0.1%. Data encryption and random string sorting also favor the 8700F, suggesting strengths in memory-latency-sensitive tasks.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins in most heavy multi-threaded compute workloads. Integer math, floating-point math, physics, prime number finding, and data compression all go to the HX 375. Its 12-core configuration provides a clear advantage in parallel compute tasks. The multithread aggregate and Geekbench multi-core also favor the HX 375. Cinebench R15 multi-core goes to the HX 375 as well, though the R23 multi-core result contradicts this trend.

The 8700F's higher base clock and desktop power envelope likely explain its single-core dominance. The HX 375's additional cores and hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c design likely explain its multi-threaded wins. The Cinebench R23 multi-core anomaly, where the 8700F wins by 22.2%, suggests that sustained multi-core performance can favor the desktop chip under certain test conditions.

The Verdict

The data presents two distinct profiles. The Ryzen 7 8700F is a desktop processor with exceptional single-core throughput. Its Cinebench R23 single-core advantage of 89.2% over the HX 375 is decisive. It also holds a 22.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, indicating strong sustained performance. Its 65 W TDP and unlocked multiplier suggest headroom for adjustment.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is a mobile processor with a 28 W TDP that delivers superior parallel compute in most tests. It wins integer math by 17.6%, floating-point math by 16.7%, and physics by 14.6%. Its 12-core, 24-thread configuration provides a clear edge in workloads that scale with core count. The 89th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, compared to the 82nd percentile for the 8700F, reflects its overall standing in the database.

Users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness, encryption tasks, and specific Cinebench R23 multi-core performance should consider the Ryzen 7 8700F. Users who need maximum parallel compute throughput across integer, floating-point, and physics workloads, and who require integrated graphics, should consider the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375. The benchmark wins split 9 to 8 in favor of the HX 375, but the magnitude of the 8700F's single-core wins gives it a strong case for single-thread-focused use cases.