AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 vs Intel Core i5-14400T Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and Intel Core i5-14400T represent two distinct philosophies in processor design: one a high-core-count mobile part built on a leading-edge node, the other a power-limited desktop chip from an established architecture. The benchmark data shows a clear split in their strengths, with the AMD part dominating multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads, while the Intel chip holds a notable advantage in one specific single-core test. The database records 14 wins for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and 1 win for the Intel Core i5-14400T across the head-to-head benchmark suite.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is the decisive winner in almost every category measured. Its most significant victories come in multi-threaded and throughput-oriented tasks. The data shows a 92.5% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core, a 26.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and a 62.8% lead in Passmark multi-thread. These results indicate a processor designed to excel when all cores are engaged, such as in video rendering, code compilation, or scientific simulations. The AMD part also shows massive advantages in data-heavy workloads: 71.8% faster in data compression, 57.1% faster in data encryption, and 76.9% faster in random string sorting. The compute-intensive Passmark tests also favor AMD substantially, with an 85.4% lead in integer math, a 52.9% lead in floating-point math, and a 101% lead in extended instructions. This is a processor that clearly prioritizes raw throughput and parallel execution capabilities.

The Intel Core i5-14400T wins only one benchmark in the head-to-head comparison: Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 2426 versus the AMD's 1988, a delta of -18.1% from the AMD perspective. This suggests that in lightly-threaded, short-burst single-core tasks, the Intel architecture can still deliver a higher peak score. However, this win is isolated. In other single-thread tests, the AMD part actually wins, such as Cinebench R15 single-core (301 vs 244, a 23.4% lead) and Passmark single-thread (3867 vs 3512, a 10.1% lead). The Intel part's single victory appears to be specific to the Cinebench R23 workload, not a general single-core superiority.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Point, and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². It features 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The memory subsystem supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory. The integrated graphics are a Radeon 890M, and it uses a PCIe Gen 4 interface with 16 lanes for the CPU. It is a mobile part, using the AMD Socket FP8, with a TDP of 28 W.

The Intel Core i5-14400T uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, and is part of the Core 14th Gen series. It is built on a 10 nm process by Intel, with a die size of 215 mm². It has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its cache configuration is different: 80 KB of L1 per core, a larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a larger shared 20 MB of L3. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, but the database does not record a memory bandwidth figure for it. It does support ECC memory, which the AMD part does not. Its integrated graphics are the UHD Graphics 730, and it uses a PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes for the CPU. It is a desktop part, using Intel Socket 1700, with a TDP of 35 W. The AMD part uses a hybrid core arrangement of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, while the Intel part relies on its traditional Raptor Lake core design.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to distinct use cases. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is the superior processor for multi-threaded productivity, content creation, and any workload that can utilize 12 cores and 24 threads. Its massive leads in integer math, floating-point math, and data encryption suggest it is well-suited for scientific computing, financial analysis, and heavy multitasking. Its higher memory bandwidth and lower TDP also make it a compelling choice for mobile workstations where efficiency matters alongside performance.

The Intel Core i5-14400T, despite its lower core count and older process node, shows a specific strength in Cinebench R23 single-core performance. This could translate to advantages in applications that are heavily dependent on a single thread's maximum clock speed, though the AMD part counters this with wins in other single-thread tests. The Intel part also offers ECC memory support, a feature absent from the AMD part, which is crucial for systems requiring error-correcting memory for data integrity. The Intel part's desktop socket and 35 W TDP suggest it is intended for low-power desktop builds or small form factor systems, while the AMD part is clearly aimed at high-performance laptops. The data indicates the AMD part is the overall performance leader by a wide margin, with an average benchmark score of 46030 versus 27166 for the Intel part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400T has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How does the AMD processor compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 leads substantially, with a 92.5% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core and a 62.8% advantage in Passmark multi-thread.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel processor wins?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-14400T wins in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 2426 against the AMD's 1988, a 18.1% advantage for Intel.

Q: What are the differences in memory support?

A: The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Core i5-14400T is built on a 10 nm process by Intel.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Core i5-14400T has a TDP of 35 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin of victory for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is in Passmark extended instructions, where it scores 29269 versus the Intel's 14562, a 101% difference. This test often involves complex, specialized instruction sets, and the AMD part's Zen 5 architecture appears to have a decisive advantage here. The second-largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, with AMD scoring 3334 versus Intel's 1732, a 92.5% lead. This is a significant gap, showing that the AMD part's 12 cores and 24 threads are far more effective in this classic rendering workload than the Intel part's 10 cores and 16 threads.

Other notable AMD wins include Passmark integer math (121754 vs 65667, an 85.4% lead), Passmark random string sorting (44552 vs 25181, a 76.9% lead), and Passmark data compression (404918 vs 235636, a 71.8% lead). The AMD part also wins in Passmark data encryption (20802 vs 13244, a 57.1% lead), Passmark floating-point math (75153 vs 49139, a 52.9% lead), and Passmark physics (1819 vs 1244, a 46.2% lead). In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 21812 versus Intel's 17189, a 26.9% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD leads with 301 versus 244, a 23.4% margin. Even in Passmark single-thread, the AMD part is ahead, scoring 3867 versus 3512, a 10.1% lead.

The single Intel victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, with a score of 2426 versus the AMD's 1988. This is an 18.1% advantage for Intel. This specific result contrasts with the AMD wins in other single-core tests, indicating that the Intel part has a particular strength in this workload that does not carry over to others. The overall record of 14 wins for AMD and 1 win for Intel makes the performance hierarchy clear, despite the Intel part's one notable success.

Specification Differences

The core specifications reveal the intended market and design priorities. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 offers 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400T offers 10 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part has a higher base clock (2.00 GHz vs 1.50 GHz) and a higher boost clock (5.10 GHz vs 4.50 GHz). The TDP is lower for the AMD part at 28 W, compared to Intel's 35 W, despite the AMD part having more cores. The socket types differ completely: AMD uses Socket FP8, while Intel uses Socket 1700.

The cache sizes also differ. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core, but the L2 cache differs: AMD has 1 MB per core, while Intel has 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache is larger on the Intel part, with 20 MB shared, versus 16 MB on the AMD part. The process node is a major difference: AMD uses 4 nm TSMC, while Intel uses 10 nm Intel. The die sizes are close, with AMD at 233 mm² and Intel at 215 mm², but the transistor density is implied to be much higher on the AMD node.

Memory support diverges: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD part supports only dual-channel memory without ECC, while the Intel part supports dual-channel with ECC. The PCIe generation differs, with AMD using Gen 4 and Intel using Gen 5, both with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics are different: AMD's Radeon 890M versus Intel's UHD Graphics 730. Finally, the market segment is different: AMD is a mobile part, Intel is a desktop part. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $221, which is the only price data recorded for either chip.