AMD Ryzen 7 9700F vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is the clear performance leader in this comparison, winning 10 of 11 head-to-head benchmark tests. The data shows a desktop processor built for sustained throughput and single-thread responsiveness, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is a mobile part that trades raw compute for integration and efficiency. The 9700F holds a 21.3% lead in single-thread performance and a 10.8% lead in multithread score, making it the obvious choice for anyone building a desktop system where performance per socket is the priority. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, with its 12 cores and integrated Radeon 890M graphics, is the pick for a compact mobile platform where the CPU and GPU must share a single package. Its 89th percentile ranking against all CPUs versus the 9700F's 94th percentile confirms the desktop chip sits higher in the overall performance distribution, but the mobile chip still delivers respectable results for its 28 W TDP envelope.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use the Zen 5 architecture and are manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process, but the similarities end there. The Ryzen 7 9700F is a Granite Ridge desktop part with 8 cores and 16 threads, built for AMD Socket AM5. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is a Strix Point mobile part with 12 cores and 24 threads, using a hybrid arrangement of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, and it mounts in AMD Socket FP8. The desktop chip has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, while the mobile chip runs at 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost. The 9700F carries a 65 W TDP, more than double the 28 W TDP of the HX 375.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both share the same per-core L1 (80 KB) and L2 (1 MB) allocations, but the 9700F has 32 MB of shared L3 cache versus 16 MB on the HX 375. The desktop part also uses a larger 70.6 mm² die with 8,315 million transistors, whereas the mobile part uses a 233 mm² die with no transistor count recorded in the database. The 9700F supports ECC memory and has an unlocked multiplier, features absent on the HX 375. The desktop chip has no integrated graphics, while the mobile chip includes Radeon 890M graphics. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 9700F provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes, the HX 375 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes. Both support DDR5, but the mobile part adds LPDDR5X support. The 9700F launched on 2025-09-15 with a launch MSRP of $289; the HX 375 launched on 2024-06-30 with no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 9700F wins in every category that stresses raw compute speed. Its best margins appear in single-thread work (21.3% ahead), prime number finding (50% ahead), physics simulation (16.7% ahead), and extended instruction workloads (15.1% ahead). These results point to a processor that responds quickly to lightly threaded tasks and accelerates instruction-heavy code. Data compression favors the 9700F by 4.2%, data encryption by 3.3%, floating-point math by 3.7%, and random string sorting by 3%. The multithread test shows a 10.8% advantage for the desktop chip, despite the mobile chip having 4 more cores and 8 more threads.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins exactly one test: integer math, where it scores 121754 against 120788, a 0.8% margin. That narrow victory suggests the 12-core hybrid arrangement can edge ahead in integer-heavy throughput when all cores are engaged, but the margin is small enough that it does not change the overall picture. The mobile chip also carries integrated graphics, which means it can handle display output and light GPU work without a separate card, something the 9700F cannot do at all. For a laptop or compact system where the CPU, GPU, and memory controller must share power and space, the HX 375 is the only viable option of the two. For desktop builders with a discrete GPU already planned, the 9700F delivers more compute in every meaningful benchmark category.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F. Its PassMark single-thread score is 4691, which is 21.3% ahead of the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375's 3867.

Q: Does the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 have more cores?

A: Yes. The HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the 9700F has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the 9700F still wins the PassMark multithread test by 10.8%.

Q: Can either processor use ECC memory?

A: Only the Ryzen 7 9700F supports ECC memory. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 does not.

Q: Which chip includes integrated graphics?

A: The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 includes Radeon 890M integrated graphics. The Ryzen 7 9700F has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: How do their memory support options differ?

A: Both support DDR5 in dual-channel mode with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 additionally supports LPDDR5X memory, while the 9700F supports only DDR5.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 7 9700F boosts to 5.50 GHz, compared to 5.10 GHz on the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375.

Q: How do the two compare in average benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 7 9700F has an average benchmark score of 69996, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has an average score of 46030, placing it in the 89th percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Ryzen 7 9700F comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it scores 183 against 122, a 50% advantage. This is a classic integer-heavy, latency-sensitive workload, and the desktop chip's higher clocks and larger L3 cache appear to drive the result. Single-thread performance shows a 21.3% gap, with the 9700F at 4691 and the HX 375 at 3867. This directly benefits everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications such as web browsing, office work, and older games that rely on one or two cores. The physics test shows a 16.7% lead for the 9700F, 2122 versus 1819, which often translates to better performance in simulation and game physics workloads. Extended instructions show a 15.1% lead, 33688 versus 29269, meaning code that uses AVX or similar instruction sets will run noticeably faster on the desktop chip.

Multithread performance favors the 9700F by 10.8%, with scores of 36470 versus 32916. This is the most surprising result given the core count mismatch: the HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads, but the 9700F's higher clocks and larger L3 cache overcome the deficit. Data compression shows a 4.2% lead for the 9700F, 421988 versus 404918, and data encryption shows a 3.3% lead, 21488 versus 20802. Floating-point math goes to the 9700F by 3.7%, 77955 versus 75153, while random string sorting goes to the 9700F by 3%, 45890 versus 44552. The only test the HX 375 wins is integer math: 121754 versus 120788, a 0.8% edge. That result shows the 12-core hybrid design can still outproduce the 8-core chip in a purely integer throughput scenario, but the margin is narrow.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the 9700F sits between the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.2% higher) and the Intel Core i7-14700KF (0.2% lower) in average score, with the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 0.7% behind and the Intel Core i7-14700K 0.9% behind. The HX 375 sits alongside the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 (0.1% lower) and the AMD EPYC 4364P (0.1% higher), with the Intel Core i9-13900HX 0.1% lower and the AMD EPYC 7303 0.2% higher. These nearest-rival placements confirm that the 9700F competes at the high end of desktop processors, while the HX 375 competes in the upper-mid range of mobile and workstation parts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The 9700F uses 8 cores and 16 threads; the HX 375 uses 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz for the desktop chip and 2.00 GHz for the mobile chip. Boost clocks are 5.50 GHz and 5.10 GHz, respectively. TDP ratings are 65 W for the 9700F and 28 W for the HX 375. The 9700F uses AMD Socket AM5, while the HX 375 uses AMD Socket FP8. L3 cache is 32 MB shared on the 9700F versus 16 MB on the HX 375, with identical per-core L1 and L2 allocations. The 9700F supports ECC memory; the HX 375 does not. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 24 lanes on the desktop chip, Gen 4 with 16 lanes on the mobile chip. Integrated graphics are absent on the 9700F and present as Radeon 890M on the HX 375. The 9700F has an unlocked multiplier; the HX 375 is locked. Memory support adds LPDDR5X on the HX 375, while both share DDR5 support with dual-channel buses and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The 9700F has a launch MSRP of $289; the HX 375 has no recorded launch MSRP. The 9700F launched on 2025-09-15, roughly 14 months after the HX 375's 2024-06-30 release. Die size differs as well: 70.6 mm² for the 9700F versus 233 mm² for the HX 375, with the desktop part listing 8,315 million transistors and no transistor count recorded for the mobile part.