AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 vs Intel Processor 300T Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads. This gives the AMD part a 6x advantage in core count and a 6x advantage in thread count.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Processor 300T has no listed boost clock, only a 3.40 GHz base clock. The AMD part also has a lower base clock at 2.00 GHz.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is built on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the Intel Processor 300T uses Intel's 10 nm process. This represents a significant generation gap in manufacturing technology.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has 16 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Processor 300T has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part offers nearly 3x the L3 capacity.

Q: What integrated graphics do these processors include?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 features the Radeon 890M, while the Intel Processor 300T includes UHD Graphics 710. The Radeon 890M is a high-end integrated solution, whereas UHD Graphics 710 is a basic display adapter.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 is a mobile processor, while the Intel Processor 300T is a desktop processor. This aligns with their sockets: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 and Intel Processor 300T represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD part uses the Zen 5 architecture from the Strix Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. This hybrid approach allows the processor to pack 12 cores and 24 threads into a mobile form factor. The Intel Processor 300T, by contrast, uses the older Raptor Lake architecture from the Raptor Lake-S codename, with just 2 cores and 4 threads.

The process node gap is substantial. AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process, while Intel uses its own 10 nm process. This difference in manufacturing technology directly impacts power efficiency and transistor density. The die size reflects this: the AMD chip measures 233 mm², while the Intel chip is smaller at 163 mm². Despite the larger die, the AMD processor is rated at a lower 28 W TDP compared to the Intel processor's 35 W TDP, a notable achievement given the core count disparity.

Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. Both processors use 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache differs: AMD provides 1 MB per core, while Intel provides 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache tells a different story. AMD offers 16 MB, while Intel provides 6 MB shared. This larger L3 pool on the AMD side supports the higher core count and helps with data-heavy workloads.

Memory support and I/O further separate the two. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a listed memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Intel's newer PCIe standard offers more bandwidth per lane, though the AMD part's integrated Radeon 890M graphics likely benefit from the unified memory architecture.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two processors are not recorded in the database. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 has a comprehensive benchmark suite, while the Intel Processor 300T has no recorded benchmark scores. This lack of direct data makes a precise per-test comparison impossible, but the available metrics provide context.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 delivers strong results across the board. In Cinebench R23, it scores 21,812 in multi-core and 1,988 in single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3,334 multi-core and 301 single-core. Geekbench results show 13,957 multi-core and 2,084 single-core. PassMark tests show 32,916 in multithread, 3,867 in single-thread, 121,754 in integer math, and 75,153 in floating point math. Data compression scores 404,918, while encryption scores 20,802. Extended instructions hit 29,269, and prime number finding scores 122. Random string sorting reaches 44,552, and physics scores 1,819.

These numbers place the AMD processor at the 89th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 46,030. The nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 with an average score of 46,062 (a delta of -0.1%), the AMD EPYC 4364P with 45,970 (delta of 0.1%), the Intel Core i9-13900HX with 46,098 (delta of -0.1%), and the AMD EPYC 7303 with 45,960 (delta of 0.2%). This indicates the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 sits in a performance tier alongside high-end desktop and server parts, despite being a mobile processor.

The Intel Processor 300T, with no recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile ranking, occupies a much lower performance position. Its average benchmark score is listed as zero, reflecting the absence of test data. The 2-core, 4-thread configuration suggests it targets basic desktop tasks, and the 6 MB L3 cache supports this positioning.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T uses 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for AMD and 3.40 GHz for Intel, but the AMD part boosts to 5.10 GHz while the Intel part has no recorded boost clock. TDP ratings are 28 W for AMD and 35 W for Intel.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700. Architecture generations are Zen 5 (Strix Point) versus Raptor Lake (Raptor Lake-S). Process nodes are 4 nm TSMC versus 10 nm Intel. Die sizes are 233 mm² versus 163 mm². L2 cache is 1 MB per core on AMD versus 1.25 MB per core on Intel, and L3 cache is 16 MB versus 6 MB shared.

Memory support differs: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is listed at 89.6 GB/s for AMD, with no figure for Intel. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes on AMD versus Gen 5 with 16 lanes on Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 890M on AMD versus UHD Graphics 710 on Intel. Market segments are mobile versus desktop. Release dates are 2024-06-30 for AMD and 2024-01-07 for Intel. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $82, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP.

The Intel Processor 300T has a part number of SRN3K, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 uses part number 100-000001682. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between these processors. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375, with its 12-core, 24-thread configuration and Zen 5 architecture, delivers scores that place it at the 89th percentile of all CPUs. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,812 and Geekbench multi-core score of 13,957 indicate strong parallel processing capability. The Intel Processor 300T, with its 2-core, 4-thread design and no recorded benchmarks, sits at the 50th percentile, indicating a baseline level of performance.

The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HX and AMD EPYC processors, with average scores within 0.2% of the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375. This places the mobile AMD processor in the same performance class as high-end desktop and server chips, which is remarkable for a 28 W part. The Intel Processor 300T, by contrast, has no rivals listed in the database, reflecting its position as a low-end desktop offering.

The specification differences reinforce this split. AMD uses a 4 nm process, newer architecture, faster boost clock, and significantly more cache. Intel uses a 10 nm process, older architecture, and no boost clock. The Intel part does offer PCIe Gen 5 and a lower launch MSRP of $82, but its core count and cache size limit its capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 wins in virtually every performance category based on the recorded data. Its multi-core scores are overwhelming, driven by the 12-core, 24-thread configuration. The PassMark multithread score of 32,916, integer math score of 121,754, and floating point math score of 75,153 all reflect a processor capable of handling demanding computational workloads. The data compression score of 404,918 and encryption score of 20,802 further demonstrate strength in data-intensive tasks. For mobile users, the 28 W TDP combined with this level of performance makes it suitable for high-end laptops requiring both CPU and integrated GPU capability, given the Radeon 890M.

The Intel Processor 300T wins in specific areas of specification, though not in measured performance. It offers a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, which may benefit lightly threaded tasks that rely on raw clock speed without boost. It also provides PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, offering newer I/O technology than the AMD part's Gen 4. The smaller die size of 163 mm² and lower launch MSRP of $82 position it as a cost-effective desktop option for basic computing. Its support for DDR4 memory allows for lower system build costs, though this comes with reduced bandwidth potential.

The data supports a clear split: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 for performance-oriented mobile computing, and the Intel Processor 300T for entry-level desktop builds where the lower price point and simpler 2-core design suffice. The 50th percentile ranking for Intel indicates it meets average performance expectations, while the 89th percentile for AMD shows it exceeds the vast majority of CPUs. Users who need parallel processing, large cache, or integrated graphics performance should select the AMD part. Users who prioritize PCIe Gen 5, DDR4 compatibility, or the lower launch MSRP should consider the Intel part.