AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 vs Intel Core i9-14900 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 records an average benchmark score of 58115, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46030. The Intel part also holds a higher percentile rank at 92 versus 89 for the AMD chip.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 leads Cinebench R23 multi-core with 31070 points against 21812 for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, a delta of 29.8 percent. The gap is nearly identical in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where Intel scores 4793 versus 3334, a 30.4 percent advantage.

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the AMD processor wins?

A: The head-to-head data shows 17 recorded benchmark comparisons, and the Intel Core i9-14900 wins all 17. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 does not win any of the tested workloads.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core i9-14900 has 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core i9-14900?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 has a launch MSRP of $549. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents a clear split: the Intel Core i9-14900 wins in every single benchmark category that both processors share. That includes all Cinebench R15 and R23 tests, both Geekbench single-core and multi-core tests, and the entire PassMark suite covering compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multithreading, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 does not record a single head-to-head win. Its role in the comparison is defined by proximity to the Intel part in certain workloads, not by outright victory. The closest margins appear in single-core oriented tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD scores 301 against 315 for Intel, a 4.4 percent gap. PassMark extended instructions show a similar 4.4 percent delta, with AMD at 29269 and Intel at 30624. These are the only two tests where the AMD processor comes within 5 percent of the Intel part.

The Intel Core i9-14900 pulls ahead most decisively in encryption and floating-point math. PassMark data encryption shows Intel at 33540 versus 20802 for AMD, a 38 percent lead. Floating-point math records Intel at 120262 against 75153, a 37.5 percent advantage. Prime number finding also favors Intel heavily, 188 versus 122, a 35.1 percent gap.

For workloads that depend on sustained multi-threaded throughput, the Intel part maintains a consistent 24.5 to 30.4 percent lead across Geekbench multi-core, Cinebench R23 multi-core, Cinebench R15 multi-core, PassMark integer math, and PassMark multithread. The database shows no workload category where the AMD processor offers a performance advantage over the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Point codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The die size measures 233 mm². The Intel Core i9-14900 uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-R codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. Its die size is 257 mm².

Cache layouts differ substantially. Both processors share an 80 KB L1 per core. The AMD part uses 1 MB of L2 per core and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part uses 2 MB of L2 per core and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. That gives Intel a larger total cache pool, which helps explain its advantage in cache-sensitive workloads like data compression and random string sorting.

The AMD processor integrates the Radeon 890M graphics solution. The Intel processor integrates UHD Graphics 770. Both parts have integrated graphics, but the database does not include graphics benchmarks for either.

Memory support separates the two as well. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with dual-channel access and a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core i9-14900 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel access, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, while the AMD part does not.

PCIe capability differs by generation. The AMD processor uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the CPU. The Intel processor uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the CPU. That gives Intel a newer PCIe interface for connected devices.

The AMD part is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP8. The Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700. The AMD chip was released on 2024-06-30, while the Intel chip was released on 2024-01-07. Both are active production parts.

Specification Differences

Core count: AMD has 12 cores, Intel has 24 cores.

Threads: AMD has 24 threads, Intel has 32 threads.

Boost clock: AMD boosts to 5.10 GHz, Intel boosts to 5.80 GHz.

TDP: AMD is rated at 28 W, Intel is rated at 65 W.

Socket: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, Intel uses Intel Socket 1700.

Architecture: AMD uses Zen 5, Intel uses Raptor Lake.

Process node: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, Intel uses 10 nm from Intel.

Die size: AMD measures 233 mm², Intel measures 257 mm².

L2 cache: AMD has 1 MB per core, Intel has 2 MB per core.

L3 cache: AMD has 16 MB, Intel has 36 MB shared.

Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Memory bandwidth: AMD records 89.6 GB/s, Intel has no recorded figure.

ECC memory: AMD does not support it, Intel supports it.

PCIe: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics: AMD uses Radeon 890M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 770.

Market segment: AMD is mobile, Intel is desktop.

Release date: AMD released 2024-06-30, Intel released 2024-01-07.

Launch MSRP: AMD has none recorded, Intel has $549.

Base clock is identical at 2.00 GHz for both. L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core. Both processors are multiplier-locked. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i9-14900 dominates every recorded comparison. The largest margin appears in PassMark data encryption, where Intel scores 33540 against 20802 for AMD, a 38 percent advantage. PassMark floating-point math shows the second-largest gap at 37.5 percent, with Intel at 120262 and AMD at 75153.

Prime number finding follows closely. Intel records 188, AMD records 122, a 35.1 percent delta. Integer math shows a 30.4 percent gap, with Intel at 175010 and AMD at 121754. Cinebench R15 multi-core matches that exact 30.4 percent delta, with Intel at 4793 and AMD at 3334.

Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 29.8 percent gap, Intel at 31070 and AMD at 21812. PassMark physics records a 26.8 percent delta, Intel at 2486 and AMD at 1819. Random string sorting shows a 27 percent gap, Intel at 61060 and AMD at 44552. Data compression records a 26.4 percent delta, Intel at 550271 and AMD at 404918. PassMark multithread shows a 26.2 percent gap, Intel at 44578 and AMD at 32916.

Geekbench multi-core records a 24.5 percent delta, Intel at 18495 and AMD at 13957. Geekbench single-core shows a 16.2 percent gap, Intel at 2488 and AMD at 2084. PassMark single-thread and singlethread both record the same 10.5 percent delta, Intel at 4323 and AMD at 3867. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 10.1 percent gap, Intel at 2212 and AMD at 1988.

The smallest margins are in Cinebench R15 single-core and PassMark extended instructions, both at 4.4 percent. In the first, Intel scores 315 against 301. In the second, Intel scores 30624 against 29269.

The AMD processor's best relative performances come in single-core and extended instruction workloads, but it still loses those tests. The Intel processor shows its strongest relative advantage in encryption, floating-point math, and prime number finding, all of which exceed 35 percent.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for multi-threaded desktop workloads: the Intel Core i9-14900 is the stronger processor. It wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 58115 versus 46030 for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375. The Intel part offers 24 cores and 32 threads versus 12 cores and 24 threads for AMD, which explains its consistent lead in rendering, compression, and integer math.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 targets a different use case entirely. It is a mobile processor on Socket FP8 with a 28 W TDP, compared to the Intel desktop part at 65 W on Socket 1700. The AMD chip uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process, which gives it efficiency advantages that the benchmark data does not directly measure. Its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and LPDDR5X support suit laptops. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5, has ECC memory capability, and uses PCIe Gen 5.

For single-core tests, the Intel part still leads, but the margins shrink. Cinebench R15 single-core shows only a 4.4 percent gap, and PassMark extended instructions match that 4.4 percent delta. The AMD processor is not uncompetitive in these lighter workloads; it simply trails the higher-clocked Intel part, which boosts to 5.80 GHz versus 5.10 GHz for AMD.

The database shows the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 sits at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core i9-14900 sits at the 92nd percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 235, AMD EPYC 4364P, Intel Core i9-13900HX, and AMD EPYC 7303, all within 0.2 percent of its average score. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D, Intel Xeon w5-2545, and AMD EPYC 9015, all within 1 percent.

The choice depends on the platform. For a desktop build where power limits are less restrictive, the Intel Core i9-14900 delivers higher absolute performance across every measured workload. For a mobile system where the 28 W TDP and integrated Radeon 890M matter, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is the only viable option between these two parts, since the Intel chip is socketed for desktops. The recorded data does not show a scenario where the AMD processor outperforms the Intel part on any benchmark, but its lower TDP and mobile packaging position it for a different class of hardware.