AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 vs Intel Core 7 250H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and the Intel Core 7 250H are two mobile processors aimed at different performance priorities. The recorded data shows a clear split: the AMD part wins 12 benchmark comparisons, while the Intel part wins 3. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 leads in the vast majority of compute-heavy tasks, particularly multi-threaded and encryption workloads, whereas the Intel Core 7 250H takes a narrow lead in single-threaded PassMark tests and physics simulation. Neither processor is universally dominant, but the pattern of wins points to distinct use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 dominates in multi-core throughput. Its most decisive victory comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 21812 against 16561 for the Intel part, a 31.7% advantage. This is the largest gap in the head-to-head results. The AMD chip also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 5.9%, with 3334 points versus 3147. For workloads that scale across cores, such as video rendering, 3D scene compilation, or scientific simulation, the AMD processor holds a significant edge.

Data compression and encryption also favor AMD strongly. The PassMark data compression test shows 404918 for the AMD part versus 303269 for Intel, a 33.5% lead. Data encryption is 14.3% faster on AMD, with 20802 points against 18206. The extended instructions benchmark, which measures SIMD and vector processing, shows a massive 69% advantage for AMD (29269 versus 17318), indicating that the AMD architecture handles complex mathematical operations much more efficiently.

The Intel Core 7 250H wins are concentrated in two areas. The PassMark single-thread test gives Intel a 6.8% lead, with 4148 points against 3867 for AMD. The same delta appears in the duplicate PassMark singlethread entry. The physics benchmark is extremely close, with Intel ahead by just 0.3% (1824 versus 1819). These wins suggest that for lightly threaded applications, particularly those that rely on a single core's peak frequency, the Intel part can respond faster. However, the margin is modest, and it does not offset the multi-core deficit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process with the Strix Point codename. It belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel Core 7 250H uses the Raptor Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, with the Raptor Lake-H codename and a Raptor Lake Refresh generation label. The process node difference is notable: 4 nm versus 10 nm, which partly explains the efficiency differences in the benchmark data.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 14 cores and 20 threads. Despite having two fewer cores, AMD provides four more threads, which helps explain its multi-core wins. The cache hierarchy also differs: AMD uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a larger 24 MB shared L3. The larger L3 on Intel could help in some cache-sensitive workloads, but the benchmark data does not show a consistent advantage from it.

Memory support differentiates the two as well. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD part has a rated memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, whereas the Intel part has no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. PCIe capabilities also differ: AMD offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel offers PCIe Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. The newer PCIe standard on Intel could matter for external storage or GPU connectivity, but the CPU benchmark scores do not reflect this.

The integrated graphics differ: AMD uses the Radeon 890M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so the comparison here is limited to processor workloads. The AMD part has a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part has a 45 W TDP, a significant difference in power envelope. The Intel part runs at a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz for AMD, and a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus 5.10 GHz, yet it still loses most benchmark comparisons.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results establish the overall pattern. In R15 multi-core, AMD wins 3334 to 3147, a 5.9% margin. In R23 multi-core, the gap widens to 31.7%, with AMD scoring 21812 and Intel scoring 16561. Single-core Cinebench results are much closer: AMD wins R15 single-core by 1% (301 versus 298) and R23 single-core by 3% (1988 versus 1931). The Intel part does not win any Cinebench test in the recorded data.

PassMark results show a similar trend but with a few exceptions. AMD wins data compression by 33.5%, data encryption by 14.3%, extended instructions by 69%, find prime numbers by 15.1%, floating point math by 15.5%, integer math by 22.9%, multithread by 21.8%, and random string sorting by 30.5%. These are all substantial margins. The Intel part wins only the physics test by 0.3% and the single-thread test by 6.8%. The physics result is essentially a tie, with 1824 versus 1819, within the margin of measurement noise. The single-thread result is more meaningful, but it is the only test where Intel has a clear, non-trivial advantage.

The extended instructions result deserves attention. A 69% delta is the largest in the entire comparison, and it indicates that the AMD Zen 5 architecture has a major advantage in vectorized code. This could affect workloads such as audio processing, image filters, or any application that uses AVX-style instructions. The data compression result, with a 33.5% lead, also suggests that the AMD part handles memory-intensive data transformation more efficiently.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is the stronger processor for multi-threaded and compute-heavy tasks. Its 31.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 33.5% lead in data compression, and 69% lead in extended instructions make it the clear choice for rendering, scientific computing, encryption, and any workload that can use many threads. The 24-thread configuration, despite having only 12 cores, gives it a parallel processing advantage that the Intel part cannot overcome with its 14 cores and 20 threads.

The Intel Core 7 250H is the better option for single-threaded responsiveness. Its 6.8% lead in PassMark single-thread and its higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz suggest that it can handle light, interactive tasks with slightly lower latency. However, the margin is small, and the Intel part loses all Cinebench single-core tests, so the single-thread advantage is not universal. The physics benchmark, where Intel leads by 0.3%, is effectively a draw.

For users who prioritize sustained multi-core performance, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is the clear winner based on the recorded scores. For users who mostly run single-threaded applications and want the highest possible clock speed, the Intel Core 7 250H has a narrow edge. The Intel part also carries a 45 W TDP versus 28 W for AMD, which may matter for thermal design, but the database does not include power efficiency benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 supports 24 threads with 12 cores, while the Intel Core 7 250H supports 20 threads with 14 cores.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The PassMark extended instructions test shows the largest delta at 69%, with the AMD part scoring 29269 against 17318 for Intel.

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins with a score of 21812, which is 31.7% higher than the Intel Core 7 250H score of 16561.

Q: Does the Intel part win any Cinebench test?

A: No. The Intel Core 7 250H loses both Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core and multi-core tests. Its only wins are in PassMark physics and PassMark single-thread tests.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Core 7 250H has a TDP of 45 W.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 | Intel Core 7 250H |

|-------|----------------------|-------------------|

| Cores | 12 | 14 |

| Threads | 24 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Point | Raptor Lake-H |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 8 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 890M | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Release Date | 2024-06-30 | 2024-12-17 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $502 |

| Part Number | 100-000001682 | SRQ6UQ5MK |

The two processors share the same L1 cache size of 80 KB per core and both use dual-channel memory. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. The AMD part has a die size of 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry. The AMD part offers more PCIe lanes (16 versus 8) but on an older generation (Gen 4 versus Gen 5). The Intel part supports DDR4 in addition to DDR5, which could be relevant for system cost, but the database does not include pricing analysis for memory.