AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 sit at nearly identical average benchmark scores, separated by a mere 0.2% in favor of the Intel part. Despite this statistical tie, the two processors achieve their scores through fundamentally different architectural approaches, and the individual benchmark results reveal distinct performance signatures that matter more than the aggregate.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T posts an average benchmark score of 46,409, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 scores 46,329. The Intel part leads by 0.2%, a margin well within run-to-run variance.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded Cinebench workloads?

A: Intel wins every multi-core Cinebench test by exactly 12.2%. The Ultra 9 285T scores 31,399 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 27,978 for the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, and the gap is consistent across R15 (3,164 vs 2,820) and R20 (13,187 vs 11,750).

Q: Are there any workloads where the AMD processor wins?

A: Yes, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins three PassMark tests: data compression (404,918 vs 328,003, a 19% advantage), extended instructions (29,269 vs 21,956, a 25% advantage), and random string sorting (44,552 vs 41,091, a 7.8% advantage).

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T leads PassMark single-thread testing with a score of 4,775 versus 3,867 for the AMD, a 23.5% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a smaller but still decisive 12.2% lead for Intel (4,432 vs 3,949).

Q: Which processor has more cores and how does that affect results?

A: The Intel part has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads. The core advantage contributes to Intel's 12.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and its 58.1% advantage in PassMark physics (2,875 vs 1,819).

Q: How do these processors rank against other CPUs?

A: Both sit at the 92nd percentile among all CPUs. The AMD's nearest rival list includes the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T at -0.2% and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T at -0.3%, while the Intel's list shows the same two parts within 0.2%.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear split: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T is the choice for users prioritizing raw computational throughput, particularly in floating-point math, physics simulation, and single-threaded responsiveness. Its 14 wins out of 17 head-to-head tests, including a 71.7% lead in floating-point math and a 161.5% lead in prime number finding, make it the dominant general-purpose compute part.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, despite its three losses, demonstrates specialized strengths in data compression, extended instruction throughput, and string sorting. For workloads that involve heavy data compression or vectorized instruction streams, the AMD part's advantages of 19% and 25% respectively are substantial and may outweigh its deficits elsewhere.

The average benchmark scores are effectively identical, and both parts occupy the same 92nd percentile. The decision hinges entirely on workload composition. Data-heavy, compression-oriented tasks favor AMD. Broad computational workloads, physics, encryption, and single-threaded applications favor Intel. The Intel part also offers desktop-class features like ECC memory support and a Gen 5 PCIe interface, which may be decisive for system integration regardless of benchmark deltas.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T dominates the Cinebench suite with remarkable consistency. Across all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core), the deltaPct is exactly 12.2% in Intel's favor. In R23 multi-core, Intel scores 31,399 against AMD's 27,978; in R23 single-core, Intel scores 4,432 against 3,949. This uniformity suggests a structural advantage in the Intel architecture rather than workload-specific optimization.

PassMark results show a more nuanced picture. Intel wins the multithread test 36,940 to 32,916, a 12.2% margin that mirrors the Cinebench results. The single-thread gap is larger: 4,775 to 3,867, a 23.5% advantage for Intel. This single-thread lead is the largest across any common benchmark category, indicating Intel's boost clock of 5.40 GHz against AMD's 5.10 GHz translates directly into responsive performance.

The most extreme Intel victories come in specialized tests. PassMark find prime numbers shows Intel at 319 versus AMD's 122, a 161.5% advantage. Floating-point math shows a 71.7% lead (129,032 vs 75,153), and physics shows a 58.1% lead (2,875 vs 1,819). Data encryption also favors Intel substantially at 38.5% (28,813 vs 20,802). These results indicate the Intel core architecture handles numeric and mathematical workloads with far greater efficiency.

AMD's three wins are concentrated in data manipulation. Data compression shows AMD at 404,918 versus 328,003, a 19% advantage. Extended instructions show AMD at 29,269 versus 21,956, a 25% advantage. Random string sorting shows AMD at 44,552 versus 41,091, a 7.8% advantage. These wins suggest the Zen 5 architecture in the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 processes memory-intensive, pattern-recognition, and compression algorithms more effectively than the Intel part.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T features 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 offers 12 cores and 24 threads. Intel's base clock is 1,400 MHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz; AMD's base clock is 2,000 MHz with a boost of 5.10 GHz. The Intel part has a TDP of 35 watts against AMD's 28 watts.

Memory support differs significantly: Intel supports DDR5 only with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while AMD supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Intel supports ECC memory; AMD does not. PCIe capabilities favor Intel with Gen 5 and 20 lanes, while AMD provides Gen 4 and 16 lanes.

The integrated graphics differ: Intel pairs with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while AMD uses the Radeon 890M. Market segments diverge with Intel positioned as Desktop on Socket 1851 and AMD as Mobile on Socket FP8. Intel's launch date is January 6, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $549; AMD has no listed launch date or MSRP. The Intel part number is SRQD3, and AMD's is 100-000001682.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T is built on Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process node at TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process node, also at TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm² and no listed transistor count. Intel's process advantage of one nanometer does not translate into a smaller die; the Intel die is 10 mm² larger.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has more than double the L3 cache, which likely contributes to its advantages in floating-point math and physics tests. AMD's smaller per-core L1 and L2 caches may explain its relative weakness in single-threaded tests.

The generation names reflect different naming conventions: Intel's is "Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake)" while AMD's is "Ryzen AI (Zen 5)". The codenames are Arrow Lake-S for Intel and Strix Point for AMD. Both processors are production-active and have locked multipliers, meaning neither supports overclocking. The architectural differences extend to memory controllers, with Intel's higher bandwidth (102.4 GB/s vs 89.6 GB/s) and AMD's broader memory type support including LPDDR5X.