AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark position?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Processor N150 sits at the 28th percentile. The AMD part's average benchmark score is 37,904, compared to 1,025 for the Intel part.

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, and by how much?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins with a score of 21,761 versus 2,590.5 for the Intel Processor N150, a delta of 740 percent.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap as large as the multi-core gap?

A: No, but it is still substantial. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD scores 2,018 versus 935 for the Intel, a delta of 115.8 percent. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD leads 306.5 to 153.15, a delta of 100.1 percent.

Q: What does the Intel Processor N150's nearest rival list indicate about its performance class?

A: The N150's average score of 1,025 places it within 0.2 percent of the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T (1,024), the Intel Core i3-4340 (1,026), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U (1,024). It is competing with a much older performance tier.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Processor N150 boosts to 3.60 GHz. The AMD base clock is 2.00 GHz, while the Intel base clock is 0.10 GHz.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Processor N150 supports single-channel memory with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

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 that mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Processor N150 uses the Twin Lake architecture under the same codename, part of the Intel Processor generation based on Alder Lake-N, and it is built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference alone, 4 nm versus 10 nm, points to a significant transistor density and efficiency gap between the two designs.

The core configuration diverges sharply. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 4 cores and 4 threads. Thread count is a major factor in the benchmark deltas, since the AMD part can process six times as many threads simultaneously. Cache allocation also differs structurally. The AMD part uses 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, plus 16 MB of L3. The Intel part uses 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has more total L3, but the Intel part has a slightly larger per-core L1 allocation and a shared L2 design.

Memory support separates the two further. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s. The memory bandwidth difference of roughly 2.3 times favors the AMD part in memory-sensitive workloads. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part uses Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the AMD part using Radeon 890M and the Intel part using UHD Graphics 730.

Power envelopes are far apart. The AMD part has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel part has a TDP of 6 watts. This explains some of the performance difference, but it also indicates the Intel part is designed for a much lower power operating point. Both parts are active production mobile chips, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part was released on 2024-06-30, while the Intel part was released on 2024-11-19.

The Verdict

The data points to two entirely different product categories. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a high-performance mobile processor aimed at workloads that scale across many threads. The Intel Processor N150 is a low-power mobile part with a 6 watt TDP that sits in the 28th percentile of all CPUs. The recorded benchmarks show the AMD part winning all four head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 100.1 percent in Cinebench R15 single-core to 740 percent in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

The AMD part's nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core i9-14901E (37,911 average score, 0 percent delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X (37,943, -0.1 percent), the Intel Core 5 211E (37,829, 0.2 percent), and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (37,804, 0.3 percent). These are all desktop-class or high-end embedded processors, which indicates the HX 370 is performing in a much higher tier than its mobile form factor suggests.

The Intel part's nearest rivals are the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T (1,024, 0.1 percent), the Intel Core i3-4340 (1,026, -0.1 percent), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U (1,024, 0.1 percent), and the Intel Core i7-5650U (1,027, -0.2 percent). These are processors from an older generation, and the N150 is effectively matching their average scores. Users who need multi-threaded compute should choose the AMD part without hesitation. Users who need minimal power draw and are working within the constraints of a 6 watt TDP would be looking at the Intel part, but the performance trade-off is enormous.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The AMD base clock is 2.00 GHz and boost clock is 5.10 GHz, versus 0.10 GHz and 3.60 GHz for the Intel part. TDP is 28 watts for AMD and 6 watts for Intel. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1264.

The architecture and process differ as described above: Zen 5 on 4 nm TSMC for AMD, Twin Lake on 10 nm Intel for the N150. The codename is Strix Point for AMD and Twin Lake for Intel. The AMD part belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), while the Intel part belongs to the Intel Processor generation (Alder Lake-N). The AMD die size is 233 mm²; no die size is recorded for the Intel part.

Cache layouts differ: AMD uses 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB L3. Intel uses 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support differs, with AMD supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X over dual-channel, and Intel supporting DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over single-channel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 38.4 GB/s for Intel. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD and Gen 3 with 9 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 890M for AMD and UHD Graphics 730 for Intel. Both have ECC disabled and locked multipliers. The part numbers are 100-000000994 for AMD and SRPNR for Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data contains four Cinebench tests, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins all four. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 3,409.5 against 422.5 for the Intel Processor N150, a delta of 707 percent. This is the second-largest gap in the set. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the AMD part scores 21,761 against 2,590.5, a delta of 740 percent. These multi-core deltas reflect the core and thread disparity: 12 cores and 24 threads versus 4 cores and 4 threads, combined with the clock speed advantage and the memory bandwidth difference.

Single-core results are closer in percentage terms but still decisive. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD part scores 306.5 against 153.15, a delta of 100.1 percent. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part scores 2,018 against 935, a delta of 115.8 percent. The single-core advantage is roughly half the size of the multi-core advantage, which suggests the AMD Zen 5 architecture has a substantial per-thread performance lead over the Intel Twin Lake design in addition to its core-count lead.

The benchmark deltas also show that the Intel part's own benchmark set is limited to Cinebench tests. The AMD part has a much broader benchmark profile, including 3DMark tests, Geekbench, and PassMark suites, but the head-to-head comparison only includes the four Cinebench tests that both parts have in common. Within those tests, the AMD part is consistently ahead by a factor of roughly 2 to 8.4 times.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of the win rather than by a division of victories. Multi-core rendering workloads show the biggest advantage for the AMD part. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 740 percent delta means the AMD part completes the same rendering workload in roughly one-eighth the time. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 707 percent delta is nearly as large. These are the workloads where the 12-core, 24-thread configuration and the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth deliver the largest returns.

Single-core workloads still favor the AMD part, but by a smaller margin. The 100.1 percent delta in Cinebench R15 single-core and the 115.8 percent delta in Cinebench R23 single-core indicate that the AMD part is roughly twice as fast per thread. This matters for lightly threaded applications such as legacy software, some office productivity tools, and certain scripting workloads that do not scale across cores. The AMD part is not just a multi-core specialist; its single-thread performance is also clearly superior.

The Intel Processor N150 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its only advantage is the 6 watt TDP, which is 22 watts lower than the AMD part's 28 watt TDP. In power-constrained scenarios, such as fanless designs or battery-critical portable devices, the Intel part operates at a much lower power draw. But the performance cost is severe: the average benchmark score drops from 37,904 to 1,025, a factor of roughly 37 times. The Intel part's nearest rivals are all processors from an older era, which confirms that the N150 is positioned for basic tasks rather than compute-intensive work. The AMD part's nearest rivals are modern desktop-class processors, which confirms that the HX 370 is positioned at the top of the mobile stack. Users who prioritize performance in any measured workload should select the AMD part; users who require the absolute lowest power envelope have the Intel part as the only option in this comparison.