AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 vs Intel Core i9-12900F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a decisive picture: the Intel Core i9-12900F wins 15 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 takes only 2. The Intel processor's largest victory is staggering. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 4292 against AMD's 1988, a 115.9% advantage. That is not a marginal lead; it is a complete rout in single-threaded rendering.

The Cinebench R15 single-core test tells a similar story, with Intel ahead by 43.5% (432 versus 301). Geekbench single-core also favors Intel, though by a narrower 12.2% margin (2339 versus 2084). The pattern is consistent: Intel's Alder Lake architecture delivers substantially stronger single-thread performance across every available measurement.

Multi-core results are more nuanced. The Intel chip wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 39.4% (30405 versus 21812), a commanding lead. Geekbench multi-core shows Intel ahead by 14.4% (15965 versus 13957). PassMark multithread testing gives Intel a 9.1% edge (35912 versus 32916). However, the AMD processor wins Cinebench R15 multi-core outright, scoring 3334 against Intel's 3064, an 8.1% advantage. That is AMD's only multi-core win in the entire dataset.

The remaining benchmark categories are mostly Intel territory. Floating point math shows Intel ahead by 28.3% (96452 versus 75153). Data encryption favors Intel by 21.4% (25251 versus 20802). Data compression gives Intel an 11.5% lead (451402 versus 404918). Integer math is closer, with Intel ahead by 6.4% (129504 versus 121754). Random string sorting favors Intel by 8.8% (48477 versus 44552). Prime number finding is nearly even, with Intel ahead by just 4.1% (127 versus 122). Physics simulation gives Intel a slim 1.3% edge (1842 versus 1819). Single-thread PassMark results show Intel ahead by 3.9% (4017 versus 3867).

AMD's second win comes in extended instructions, where it scores 29269 against Intel's 28265, a 3.4% advantage. That is a modest but real victory in a workload that benefits from AMD's newer instruction handling.

Looking at aggregate scores, the Intel chip records an average benchmark score of 47176, while AMD sits at 46030. Both processors land in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Intel's nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-13700KF, scores 47330, a mere 0.3% difference. AMD's closest competitor, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235, scores 46062, also within 0.1%. The overall balance of these two chips is nearly identical, even though their workload profiles diverge sharply.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i9-12900F wins 15 of 17 comparisons. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins 2.

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

A: Cinebench R23 single-core. Intel scores 4292, AMD scores 1988, giving Intel a 115.9% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD processor win any multi-core tests?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins Cinebench R15 multi-core with 3334 against Intel's 3064, an 8.1% lead.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: Intel's average is 47176, AMD's is 46030. Both sit in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: Intel wins every single-thread test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 115.9% higher, Cinebench R15 single-core shows 43.5% higher, Geekbench single-core shows 12.2% higher, and PassMark single-thread shows 3.9% higher.

Q: Are the two processors close in overall performance?

A: Yes. Intel's average score of 47176 is only 2.5% above AMD's 46030. Their nearest rivals in the database are similarly close, with deltas under 1% in most cases.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Core i9-12900F uses Alder Lake architecture on a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel. The die measures 215 mm². AMD's Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses Zen 5 architecture with a Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid core arrangement, built on TSMC's 4 nm process. Its die is larger at 233 mm² despite having fewer cores.

Core counts differ significantly. Intel packs 16 cores and 24 threads. AMD offers 12 cores and 24 threads. Both processors therefore handle the same number of threads, but Intel distributes them across more physical cores. The cache hierarchies also diverge. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. AMD matches the 80 KB L1 per core but reduces L2 to 1 MB per core and L3 to 16 MB total. Intel's larger cache pool likely contributes to its multi-core and single-core wins in rendering workloads.

Memory support separates the two as well. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with 76.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but achieves 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. That higher bandwidth does not translate into benchmark victories for AMD, as the data shows.

PCIe connectivity differs. Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The Intel platform's newer PCIe generation offers more headroom for expansion, though no benchmark in the dataset directly measures this.

Integrated graphics are another differentiator. AMD includes Radeon 890M graphics, while Intel's i9-12900F has no integrated graphics at all. This makes the AMD chip a complete package for systems without a discrete GPU, while Intel requires a separate graphics card.

ECC memory support is present on Intel but absent on AMD. The Intel part also has an unlocked multiplier, while AMD's multiplier is locked. Production status is active for both, but their release dates are far apart: Intel launched on January 3, 2022, AMD on June 30, 2024.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. Intel uses 16 cores and 24 threads; AMD uses 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks differ, with Intel at 2.40 GHz and AMD at 2.00 GHz. Both boost to 5.10 GHz, the only clock-related specification they share.

Thermal design power shows a major divergence. Intel is rated at 65 W, AMD at 28 W. That difference reflects their target markets: Intel is a desktop part, AMD is a mobile part. The socket also differs: Intel uses Socket 1700, AMD uses Socket FP8.

Process technology separates them further. Intel uses 10 nm from its own foundry. AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC. Die size is 215 mm² for Intel, 233 mm² for AMD. L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB for Intel versus 1 MB for AMD. L3 cache is 30 MB shared for Intel versus 16 MB for AMD.

Memory support is broader on Intel, which handles DDR4 and DDR5, while AMD handles DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is higher on AMD at 89.6 GB/s versus Intel's 76.8 GB/s. ECC memory is supported by Intel, not by AMD. PCIe generation is Gen 5 for Intel, Gen 4 for AMD, both with 16 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics exist only on AMD, with Radeon 890M. Intel has none. Market segments differ: Intel is desktop, AMD is mobile. Launch MSRP for Intel is $494; AMD has no recorded launch MSRP. The multiplier is unlocked on Intel, locked on AMD. Part numbers are SRL4L for Intel and 100-000001682 for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-12900F is the clear choice for single-threaded performance. It dominates every single-core test in the dataset, with particularly large margins in Cinebench R23 and Cinebench R15. Any workload that relies on strong per-core performance, such as lightly threaded applications or games, benefits from Intel's architecture.

Intel also wins the majority of multi-threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core, Geekbench multi-core, PassMark multithread, floating point math, data compression, data encryption, integer math, random string sorting, prime number finding, and physics simulation all favor Intel. The 16-core, 24-thread configuration with 30 MB of L3 cache provides a strong foundation for rendering, content creation, and general productivity.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins exactly two benchmarks: Cinebench R15 multi-core and PassMark extended instructions. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win is notable because it is a legacy rendering workload that responds well to AMD's core design. The extended instructions win suggests AMD's Zen 5 architecture handles certain specialized instruction sets more efficiently.

AMD's integrated Radeon 890M graphics is a decisive advantage for systems without a discrete GPU, though no benchmark in the dataset measures graphics performance. Its 28 W TDP also makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency matters more than raw compute.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case. The Intel Core i9-12900F is the superior processor for raw performance in nearly every measured category. It wins 15 of 17 benchmarks, including every single-thread test and the majority of multi-thread tests. Its average benchmark score of 47176 is higher than AMD's 46030, and both sit in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. Desktop users building a system with a discrete GPU and seeking maximum compute performance should choose the Intel part.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 serves a different purpose. Its 28 W TDP, mobile socket, and integrated Radeon 890M graphics make it a complete mobile solution. It cannot match Intel's single-thread performance, and it loses most multi-thread comparisons, but it wins Cinebench R15 multi-core and extended instructions. Its higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and newer 4 nm process node offer architectural advantages that do not always show up in the benchmark scores. Users who need a self-contained mobile processor with integrated graphics and modest power requirements should pick the AMD chip.

For users comparing aggregate scores, the two are nearly identical despite their architectural differences. Intel's average of 47176 versus AMD's 46030 represents a 2.5% gap. The nearest rivals in the database confirm this tight grouping: Intel's closest competitor, the Core i7-13700KF, is only 0.3% away, and AMD's closest competitor, the Core Ultra 5 235, is only 0.1% away. The Intel Core i9-12900F is the stronger performer overall, but the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is the more versatile mobile package.