AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 vs Intel Processor N250 Comparison

The Verdict

The database records two distinct mobile processors that occupy very different segments. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 is a high-end 12-core part built on the Zen 5 architecture, while the Intel Processor N250 is a low-power 4-core entry-level chip. Benchmark results for the Intel N250 are absent from the database, which limits direct numerical comparison, but the specification gap is substantial and informative.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 shows a 92nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 58826. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 9645 (0.2% behind), Intel Xeon w5-2545 (0.5% ahead), AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D (0.8% ahead), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M (0.9% ahead), placing it in serious workstation-class territory. The Intel N250 sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmarks or rival comparisons. The data presents a clear picture: the Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 is designed for demanding workloads, whereas the Intel N250 is positioned for basic tasks where power efficiency matters more than raw performance. Anyone selecting between these parts should base the choice on workload intensity, not price, since the database contains no pricing information.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Processor N250 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 has a TDP of 28 watts. The Intel Processor N250 has a TDP of 6 watts, indicating a much lower power envelope.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 boosts up to 5.20 GHz. The Intel Processor N250 boosts up to 3.80 GHz.

Q: What memory configurations do these processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Processor N250 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are there recorded benchmark scores for the Intel N250?

A: No, the database contains an empty benchmark array for the Intel N250, meaning no scores are available for comparison. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 has 15 recorded benchmark entries.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 is fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. The Intel Processor N250 uses a 10 nm Intel process.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is fundamental. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the codename Gorgon Point, belonging to the Ryzen AI 400 generation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Processor N250 uses the Twin Lake architecture, which is itself part of the Intel Processor generation derived from Alder Lake-N. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel, and no die size is recorded.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD chip provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD design allocates more total cache across a larger core count, while the Intel design uses smaller shared pools for its four cores.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel N250 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 but operates over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel uses Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics also differ: the AMD part uses Radeon 890M, while the Intel part has UHD Graphics 730. Both are mobile-market segments, and both are active production parts. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD release date is recorded as December 31, 2025, while the Intel release date is January 6, 2025.

Specification Differences

The core count difference is the most obvious divider: 12 cores and 24 threads on the AMD side versus 4 cores and 4 threads on the Intel side. Base clocks show a substantial gap: the AMD chip runs at 2.00 GHz base, while the Intel chip has a remarkably low 0.10 GHz base clock. Boost clocks are closer but still distinct: 5.20 GHz for AMD versus 3.80 GHz for Intel.

Power draw separates these parts by a factor of nearly five. The AMD processor has a TDP of 28 watts; the Intel processor has a TDP of 6 watts. Socket types are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP8, Intel uses BGA 1264.

Process technology differs by node size: 4 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. The AMD part includes a die size figure of 233 mm², while the Intel part has no recorded die size. Cache configurations are structurally different: per-core L1 and L2 on AMD versus shared L2 and L3 on Intel. Memory channels split between dual-channel and single-channel, with corresponding bandwidth figures of 89.6 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s.

PCIe generations and lane counts differ: Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD, Gen 3 with 9 lanes for Intel. The AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory; the Intel chip supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. Integrated graphics are different models: Radeon 890M versus UHD Graphics 730. No launch MSRP is recorded for either part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors, and the Intel N250 has an empty benchmark array. However, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 has a full set of recorded scores that place it in context against its nearest rivals.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 23491.5 points, which is a strong result given its 92nd percentile standing. Single-core R23 shows 2066 points. Cinebench R15 multi-core reaches 3518, with single-core at 317. PassMark results are extensive: multi-thread scores 37010, single-thread scores 4124, integer math scores 130171, floating point math scores 81320, extended instructions score 34365, data encryption scores 23746, data compression scores 484584, prime number finding scores 125, random string sorting scores 51576, and physics scores 1851.

The average benchmark score of 58826 places the AMD part in close competition with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 9645 at 58916 (0.2% higher), Intel Xeon w5-2545 at 58504 (0.5% lower), AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D at 58386 (0.8% lower), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M at 58323 (0.9% lower). This clustering suggests the Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 sits at a performance plateau shared by several workstation and server-class chips. The AMD chip is effectively tied with these rivals in average score, with deltas under one percent in all cases.

Since the Intel N250 has no recorded scores, no direct numerical comparison can be made. The absence of data itself is a meaningful signal: the database only includes benchmark results for CPUs with sufficient testing, and the N250 has none. Its 50th percentile ranking, based on the overall CPU distribution, places it at the median of all recorded processors, but without specific scores, the exact performance level cannot be quantified.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470 wins in every workload category where data exists. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration with a 5.20 GHz boost clock and 16 MB of L3 cache gives it clear advantages in multi-threaded applications. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23491.5 and PassMark multi-thread score of 37010 indicate strong performance in rendering, compilation, and scientific computing tasks. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth supports data-intensive workloads, while the 4 nm TSMC process provides a power-efficient baseline for sustained load.

The Intel Processor N250 wins in the power envelope category. Its 6-watt TDP is dramatically lower than the AMD chip's 28-watt TDP, making it more suitable for fanless designs, compact laptops, and always-on devices. The 0.10 GHz base clock suggests aggressive power gating, and the single-channel memory with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for light productivity and media playback. The 10 nm Intel process is older than AMD's 4 nm node, but the lower core count and clock speeds keep power consumption minimal. The Intel chip also supports DDR4 memory, which can reduce system cost for entry-level designs, though the database does not include pricing.

The AMD part is the choice for users who need compute density: software rendering, video encoding, complex spreadsheets, virtual machines, or developer builds. The 24 threads provide near-workstation-level parallelism, and the 92nd percentile ranking confirms its position among high-end parts. The Intel part is the choice for basic web browsing, document editing, and lightweight media consumption where battery life and thermal output take priority over performance. The 4-core, 4-thread design with a 3.80 GHz boost clock handles single-threaded tasks acceptably, and the 50th percentile ranking reflects its mid-pack standing.

The data does not support any performance advantage for the Intel N250 outside of power consumption. The AMD chip leads in raw metrics across all recorded benchmarks, while the Intel chip leads only in TDP efficiency. For workloads that can tolerate low power draw, the Intel part delivers a basic computing experience; for workloads that demand throughput, the AMD part is the clear performer. The absence of Intel benchmark scores means its real-world capabilities remain unmeasured in the database, leaving the comparison incomplete but directionally clear.