AMD Ryzen 9 270 vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 and the AMD Ryzen 9 270 are a study in contrasts despite their near-identical average benchmark scores. The data shows a 0.0% deltaPct between their average scores (42878 vs 42873), placing them in a statistical tie at the 91st percentile among all CPUs. Yet the underlying workloads tell a far more divided story, with one chip winning 11 head-to-head tests and the other taking 6. The HX PRO 370 edges ahead in most multi-threaded rendering tasks, while the Ryzen 9 270 counters with decisive wins in encryption, extended instructions, and string sorting.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the HX PRO 370 delivers a 41.1% advantage over the Ryzen 9 270 (127 vs 90). This is not a marginal gain; it is the largest single delta in the entire comparison, indicating a substantial architectural edge in integer-heavy, latency-sensitive operations. The HX PRO 370 also wins PassMark physics by 22.4% (1811 vs 1479) and floating point math by 8.3% (68920 vs 63640), suggesting its extra cores are leveraged effectively in simulation and scientific workloads.

In Cinebench tests, the HX PRO 370 maintains a consistent but narrow lead across the board. Every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 iteration, both single-core and multi-core, shows the same 1.9% deltaPct in favor of the HX PRO 370. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 26935 vs 26438, and single-core scores 3802 vs 3732. These are small but uniform gains, meaning the HX PRO 370 is not just faster in one specific rendering mode but broadly more efficient in Cinebench’s mixed workload. The PassMark multithread test also goes to the HX PRO 370, but by a slimmer 1% margin (31425 vs 31104), and integer math shows a 9.6% advantage (113247 vs 103292).

The Ryzen 9 270, however, is no pushover. Its data encryption score of 22636 crushes the HX PRO 370’s 19381, a 14.4% swing in its favor. PassMark extended instructions also favor the Ryzen 9 270 by 10.1% (28936 vs 26014), and random string sorting shows a 12.3% win (46810 vs 41043). Data compression is a closer contest, with the Ryzen 9 270 taking it by 1.3% (377029 vs 372313). Even in single-threaded PassMark, the Ryzen 9 270 ekes out a 0.5% win (3970 vs 3952), reversing the Cinebench single-core trend. This split suggests the Ryzen 9 270 has a raw execution advantage in certain instruction paths, even while losing the overall multi-core race.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split lies in core count and microarchitecture. The HX PRO 370 is a 12-core, 24-thread part built on Zen 5, codenamed Strix Point, with a 28W TDP. The Ryzen 9 270 is an 8-core, 16-thread chip on Zen 4, codenamed Hawk Point, rated at 45W TDP. Both use TSMC’s 4nm process and the AMD Socket FP8, but the die sizes differ: the HX PRO 370 measures 233 mm² while the Ryzen 9 270 is smaller at 178 mm². The transistor count is only listed for the Ryzen 9 270 at 25,000 million, leaving the HX PRO 370 unquantified in the data.

Cache layouts diverge significantly. The HX PRO 370 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of L3. The Ryzen 9 270 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, but its 16 MB of L3 is marked as shared. Both have identical memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s and dual-channel memory buses, but the HX PRO 370 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Ryzen 9 270 is limited to DDR5. The HX PRO 370 also features ECC memory support, which the Ryzen 9 270 lacks.

Integrated graphics differ as well: the HX PRO 370 pairs with a Radeon 890M, while the Ryzen 9 270 uses a Radeon 780M. PCIe connectivity is not identical either — the HX PRO 370 offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Ryzen 9 270 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Base and boost clocks also favor the Ryzen 9 270: it starts at 4.00 GHz and boosts to 5.20 GHz, versus the HX PRO 370’s 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, and both are listed as Active production for the Mobile market segment, released on the same date in January 2025.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear division of labor. The HX PRO 370 is the better all-around multi-threaded processor, winning the majority of tests including all Cinebench variants, PassMark physics, floating point math, integer math, and prime number finding. Its 12 cores and 24 threads give it a structural advantage in rendering and simulation tasks, and the 41.1% lead in prime numbers indicates a strong performance in workloads that depend on rapid integer iteration. The 22.4% physics win reinforces this: if your workload is CPU-bound physics, the HX PRO 370 is the choice.

The Ryzen 9 270 is not obsolete; it is simply specialized differently. Its 14.4% encryption win and 10.1% extended instructions win show it handles cryptographic and SIMD-heavy code more efficiently, likely due to its higher base clock of 4.00 GHz versus 2.00 GHz. The 12.3% random string sorting win also points to better memory access patterns in certain sorting algorithms. For users whose primary tasks are encryption, compression, or specific data processing pipelines, the Ryzen 9 270 holds a practical edge despite having fewer cores.

There is no universal winner here. The average scores are effectively identical, and the 91st percentile ranking applies to both. The decision hinges on the workload mix. For mixed productivity, rendering, and scientific computing, the HX PRO 370’s 11 wins out of 17 tests make it the safer default. For specialized security or data-processing tasks, the Ryzen 9 270’s targeted victories may matter more than its overall loss in the broad benchmark suite.

Specification Differences

• Cores/Threads: HX PRO 370 has 12 cores/24 threads; Ryzen 9 270 has 8 cores/16 threads.
• Base/Boost Clock: HX PRO 370 runs at 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost; Ryzen 9 270 runs at 4.00 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost.
• TDP: HX PRO 370 is rated at 28W; Ryzen 9 270 is rated at 45W.
• Architecture/Codename: HX PRO 370 is Zen 5 (Strix Point); Ryzen 9 270 is Zen 4 (Hawk Point).
• Die Size: HX PRO 370 is 233 mm²; Ryzen 9 270 is 178 mm².
• L1 Cache: HX PRO 370 has 80 KB per core; Ryzen 9 270 has 64 KB per core.
• L3 Cache: HX PRO 370 is 16 MB; Ryzen 9 270 is 16 MB (shared).
• Memory Support: HX PRO 370 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X; Ryzen 9 270 supports only DDR5.
• ECC Memory: Supported on HX PRO 370; not supported on Ryzen 9 270.
• PCIe Lanes: HX PRO 370 has 16 lanes (Gen 4); Ryzen 9 270 has 20 lanes (Gen 4).
• Integrated Graphics: HX PRO 370 uses Radeon 890M; Ryzen 9 270 uses Radeon 780M.
• Transistor Count: Listed only for Ryzen 9 270 at 25,000 million; not specified for HX PRO 370.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 scores 26935, which is 1.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 270’s 26438.

Q: Is the Ryzen 9 270 faster in any single-threaded test?

A: Yes. In PassMark single-thread, the Ryzen 9 270 scores 3970 versus 3952 for the HX PRO 370, a 0.5% advantage, despite losing the Cinebench R23 single-core test.

Q: Which chip has better data encryption performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 270 wins by a significant margin, scoring 22636 in PassMark data encryption compared to 19381 for the HX PRO 370, a 14.4% delta.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The HX PRO 370 supports ECC memory, but the Ryzen 9 270 does not.

Q: What is the difference in core count and TDP?

A: The HX PRO 370 has 12 cores and a 28W TDP, while the Ryzen 9 270 has 8 cores and a 45W TDP.

Q: Which processor has a larger die size?

A: The HX PRO 370 has a die size of 233 mm², while the Ryzen 9 270 is smaller at 178 mm².

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 wins in: all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests (single and multi-core), PassMark find prime numbers (41.1% lead), PassMark floating point math, PassMark integer math, PassMark multithread (1% lead), and PassMark physics (22.4% lead). This makes it the pick for rendering, scientific computing, physics simulation, and general multi-threaded productivity.

AMD Ryzen 9 270 wins in: PassMark data compression (1.3%), PassMark data encryption (14.4%), PassMark extended instructions (10.1%), PassMark random string sorting (12.3%), and PassMark single-thread (0.5%). Its higher base clock and lower core count make it better suited for encryption, SIMD-heavy code, and sorting algorithms, as well as lightly-threaded tasks where its 4.00 GHz base clock provides a head start.

The practical advice is straightforward: choose the HX PRO 370 for a balanced mobile workstation that excels in the broadest range of CPU-bound tasks, and pick the Ryzen 9 270 only if your specific workload is dominated by encryption, compression, or data-sorting pipelines where its 10-14% advantages are worth the loss in multi-core performance. The 0.0% average score delta means you are trading one set of strengths for another, not upgrading or downgrading in a general sense.