AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 vs Intel Core 7 160UL Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins every single head-to-head benchmark against the Intel Core 7 160UL. Across 15 comparative tests, AMD takes 15 wins and Intel takes zero. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 37904, while the Intel part sits at 14232, a gap that places them in entirely different performance tiers. The AMD chip ranks in the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel chip ranks in the 69th percentile.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is the clear choice for anyone whose workload depends on sustained multi-threaded compute, content creation, encryption, or any task that scales with core count and memory bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 160UL, by contrast, is positioned for a different role entirely: it operates at a 15 W TDP compared to AMD's 28 W, uses a 10 nm Intel process node versus AMD's 4 nm TSMC node, and targets the desktop socket LGA 1700. The data shows the Intel part is not competitive in raw performance, but its lower TDP and different platform fit may suit specific low-power desktop builds where the AMD mobile part is not an option.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI 300 generation. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core 7 160UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The process node difference alone explains a significant portion of the efficiency and performance gap.

The core configurations differ sharply. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 10 cores and 12 threads. The thread count difference of 12 threads is substantial for parallel workloads. AMD's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Intel's base clock is 1.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. Despite Intel's slightly higher boost clock, the AMD part wins every single-threaded benchmark in the dataset.

Cache layouts also diverge. Both parts use an 80 KB L1 cache per core. AMD's L2 cache is 1 MB per core, while Intel's is 1.25 MB per core. AMD's L3 cache is 16 MB, while Intel's is 12 MB shared. The total cache hierarchy favors AMD in L3 capacity, while Intel has a slight per-core L2 advantage.

Memory support differs as well. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, but the database has no bandwidth figure recorded for it. AMD's PCIe implementation offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes. The integrated graphics differ: AMD uses the Radeon 890M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU.

The sockets are incompatible. AMD uses the FP8 mobile socket, while Intel uses the LGA 1700 desktop socket. The AMD part is classified as mobile, the Intel part as desktop. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and neither supports ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 appears in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 31653 against Intel's 5832, a delta of 442.7%. This indicates a massive advantage in workloads using advanced instruction sets.

PassMark data compression shows AMD at 445719 versus Intel's 108953, a 309.1% delta. Random string sorting follows at 311.4% in AMD's favor, with scores of 48723 and 11843 respectively. These are memory-heavy and cache-sensitive workloads, and AMD's larger L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth explain the margin.

Cinebench R15 multicore gives AMD 3409.5 against Intel's 946, a 260.4% delta. The Cinebench R23 multicore result shows 21761 versus 9386, a 131.8% delta. PassMark multithread shows 35148 versus 11043, a 218.3% delta. These confirm that the AMD part's 12 cores and 24 threads translate into roughly two to three times the multi-threaded throughput of Intel's 10 cores and 12 threads.

Single-threaded results are closer but still favor AMD. PassMark single-thread shows 3973 versus 3391, a 17.2% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2018 versus 1325, a 52.3% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 306.5 versus 133, a 130.5% delta. The single-thread advantage is real but smaller than the multi-thread margins, which is consistent with the similar boost clocks.

PassMark floating-point math gives AMD 76892 versus 25670, a 199.5% delta. Integer math gives 122933 versus 47515, a 158.7% delta. Data encryption gives 22252 versus 7146, a 211.4% delta. Find prime numbers gives 126 versus 50, a 152% delta. Physics gives 1881 versus 819, a 129.7% delta.

Every benchmark in the head-to-head set goes to AMD. There is no recorded test where the Intel Core 7 160UL outperforms the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field recorded in the database.

• Cores: AMD has 12, Intel has 10.
• Threads: AMD has 24, Intel has 12.
• Base clock: AMD is 2.00 GHz, Intel is 1.80 GHz.
• Boost clock: AMD is 5.10 GHz, Intel is 5.20 GHz.
• TDP: AMD is 28 W, Intel is 15 W.
• Socket: AMD uses FP8, Intel uses LGA 1700.
• Architecture: AMD uses Zen 5, Intel uses Raptor Lake.
• Codename: AMD is Strix Point, Intel is Raptor Lake-PS.
• Generation: AMD is Ryzen AI 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), Intel is Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS).
• Process node: AMD is 4 nm, Intel is 10 nm.
• Foundry: AMD uses TSMC, Intel uses Intel.
• Die size: AMD is 233 mm², Intel has no recorded value.
• L2 cache: AMD is 1 MB per core, Intel is 1.25 MB per core.
• L3 cache: AMD is 16 MB, Intel is 12 MB shared.
• Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD is 89.6 GB/s, Intel has no recorded value.
• PCIe: AMD is Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel is Gen 4 with 8 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: AMD uses Radeon 890M, Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU.
• Market segment: AMD is mobile, Intel is desktop.
• Release date: AMD released 2024-06-30, Intel released 2024-04-07.
• Part number: AMD has 100-000000994, Intel has unknown.

Both parts have the same L1 cache per core, both use dual-channel memory buses, both lack ECC support, both are locked multipliers, and both are marked active in production status. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD part has a 28 W TDP. The Intel part has a 15 W TDP. Intel's lower TDP indicates a lower thermal design point, though the benchmark data shows AMD delivers far higher performance at its higher power envelope.

Q: How large is the multi-threaded performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, AMD scores 21761 while Intel scores 9386, a delta of 131.8%. PassMark multithread shows 35148 versus 11043, a delta of 218.3%.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is slightly higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370's 5.10 GHz. Despite this, AMD wins every single-threaded benchmark in the dataset.

Q: Do these processors use the same socket?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel Core 7 160UL uses Intel Socket 1700. They are not interchangeable.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD part is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel part is built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The smaller node contributes to AMD's higher transistor density and efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins every recorded benchmark, so the performance-based use-case split is one-sided. The data confirms AMD's dominance in multi-threaded rendering workloads: Cinebench R23 multicore at 21761 versus 9386, and Cinebench R15 multicore at 3409.5 versus 946. These results point to 3D rendering, video encoding, and compilation tasks as clear AMD territory.

Data compression and encryption workloads heavily favor AMD. The 309.1% delta in compression and the 211.4% delta in encryption indicate that archive management, database processing, and secure data handling all run substantially faster on the AMD part. Extended instruction workloads show the largest margin at 442.7%, meaning SIMD-heavy scientific or engineering applications benefit most from the AMD architecture.

The Intel Core 7 160UL has no benchmark wins in the dataset. Its recorded advantages are structural rather than performance-based. It uses a lower 15 W TDP, which may suit thermally constrained desktop systems. Its LGA 1700 socket makes it compatible with a different motherboard ecosystem than AMD's FP8. Its support for DDR4 alongside DDR5 gives it flexibility for older memory platforms, while AMD supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

The AMD part's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes give it a platform-level advantage for storage and I/O expansion. Intel's 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes halve the available CPU-attached expansion bandwidth. The AMD part also carries the Radeon 890M integrated graphics, while Intel carries the Iris Xe Graphics 96EU; the database records no direct graphics benchmark comparison, so that remains unresolved in these measurements.

For users choosing between these two on recorded data alone, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is the superior performer in every measured category. The Intel Core 7 160UL only becomes relevant in scenarios where the lower TDP, the desktop socket, or DDR4 memory compatibility are mandatory requirements. The benchmark record offers no performance reason to select the Intel part.