AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265F Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a decisive performance advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F across every shared benchmark in the database. Out of 15 head-to-head comparisons, the Intel part wins all 15, with no recorded wins for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370. The Intel processor sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD chip sits in the 86th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 64,438, compared to 37,904 for the AMD part, a substantial gap that places them in different performance tiers.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 remains relevant as a mobile processor with integrated graphics, making it suitable for laptops where power efficiency and on-chip GPU capability matter. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is a desktop part without integrated graphics, and its benchmark results indicate it is the stronger choice for compute-heavy desktop workloads. For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput, single-core speed, or math-heavy tasks, the data points exclusively toward Intel. For users needing a mobile platform with built-in graphics, the AMD part is the only one of the two that fits that use case.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectures and target different market segments. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 uses the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Point, part of the Ryzen AI 300 generation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the codename Arrow Lake-S, part of the Core Ultra Series 2. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC and has a die size of 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors.

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 20 cores and 20 threads. This means the AMD chip supports simultaneous multithreading, doubling its thread count, while the Intel chip has more physical cores but no hyperthreading. The Intel part has a higher base clock of 2.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 5.10 GHz.

Cache configurations also differ. The AMD part features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part also uses a different socket (Intel Socket 1851 versus AMD Socket FP8) and has a higher TDP of 65 watts versus 28 watts, reflecting its desktop positioning versus the mobile positioning of the AMD chip.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel part supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Intel part has a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part. Neither supports ECC memory. The PCIe configuration also differs: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F leads in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, but the margins vary considerably by workload. The largest gaps appear in single-core and multi-core rendering tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel part scores 5,926 versus 2,018 for the AMD part, a delta of -65.9%, meaning the AMD chip trails by roughly two-thirds. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part scores 41,980 versus 21,761, a delta of -48.2%. Cinebench R15 shows similar patterns: Intel leads single-core 597 to 306.5 (delta -48.7%) and multi-core 4,231 to 3,409.5 (delta -19.4%).

The PassMark suite reveals more of the same. The most extreme gap is in the find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 416 versus 126 for AMD, a delta of -69.7%. Floating point math shows Intel at 173,855 versus 76,892, a delta of -55.8%. Data encryption shows Intel at 39,468 versus 22,252, a delta of -43.6%. Physics simulation favors Intel at 3,172 versus 1,881, a delta of -40.7%.

The narrowest margins are still Intel wins. PassMark integer math shows Intel at 138,078 versus 122,933, a delta of -11%. Data compression shows Intel at 507,018 versus 445,719, a delta of -12.1%. The single-thread PassMark test shows Intel at 4,750 versus 3,973, a delta of -16.4%. Extended instructions favor Intel at 39,235 versus 31,653, a delta of -19.3%. Random string sorting shows Intel at 62,439 versus 48,723, a delta of -22%. The overall PassMark multithread score is 49,410 for Intel versus 35,148 for AMD, a delta of -28.9%.

The AMD part does have additional benchmark results not shared with the Intel part, including 3DMark tests across various thread counts and Geekbench scores. In 3DMark, the AMD part scores 9,365 with 16 threads, 9,725 with max threads, and 1,153 in single-thread. Its Geekbench scores are 15,242 multi-core and 2,407 single-core. These results are not directly comparable to the Intel part since the Intel database entry lacks those tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F has 20 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD part has fewer physical cores but benefits from simultaneous multithreading, doubling its thread count.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two?

A: The largest recorded gap is in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Intel part scores 416 versus 126 for the AMD part, a delta of -69.7%. The Cinebench R23 single-core test also shows a large gap, with Intel at 5,926 versus 2,018, a delta of -65.9%.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 includes Radeon 890M integrated graphics. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What are the release dates for these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 was released on 2024-06-30. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F was released on 2025-01-06.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F has an average benchmark score of 64,438, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has an average benchmark score of 37,904. The Intel part also ranks higher in the 93rd percentile versus the 86th percentile for the AMD part.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F wins every workload category that was directly compared. In rendering, it dominates Cinebench R15 and R23 both in single-core and multi-core tests. In math workloads, it leads floating point math by 55.8% and integer math by 11%. In data processing, it leads data compression by 12.1%, data encryption by 43.6%, and random string sorting by 22%. In physics simulation, it leads by 40.7%. In single-thread performance, it leads by 16.4% on the PassMark single-thread test.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 does not win any head-to-head benchmark, but its unique capabilities define its use case. It is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP8 with a 28 watt TDP, making it appropriate for laptops and compact systems where power draw is a constraint. It includes the Radeon 890M integrated GPU, enabling systems without a discrete graphics card. It also supports LPDDR5X memory, which is common in thin-and-light mobile designs.

The Intel part, by contrast, is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1851 with a 65 watt TDP. It has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU. Its higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes position it for desktop builds with high-throughput storage and graphics. The launch MSRP for the Intel part is $379.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F has 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for AMD versus 2.40 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.10 GHz for AMD versus 5.30 GHz for Intel. TDP is 28 watts for AMD versus 65 watts for Intel.

The AMD part uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel part uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. The process node is 4 nm for AMD versus 3 nm for Intel, both from TSMC. The die size is 233 mm² for AMD versus 243 mm² for Intel. The Intel part lists its transistor count at 17,800 million, while the AMD part does not list a transistor count.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support differs with the AMD part supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel part supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 102.4 GB/s for Intel. Neither supports ECC memory.

The PCIe interface differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part includes Radeon 890M integrated graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics. The AMD part targets the mobile segment on AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part targets the desktop segment on Intel Socket 1851. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part number is 100-000000994, and the Intel part number is SRQCV.