AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 across all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with zero wins recorded for the Intel Core 7 240H. The margins are substantial in nearly every category, though they vary considerably between single-threaded and heavily parallel workloads.

The largest advantage appears in PassMark's extended instructions test, where the AMD part scores 32803 against Intel's 16897, a 94.1% delta. This indicates a massive gap in SIMD and specialized instruction execution efficiency, likely reflecting the architectural generation difference between Zen 5 and Raptor Lake. Data compression shows a 69.7% lead (461195 versus 271774), and random string sorting follows closely at 69.1% (48824 versus 28866). These workloads benefit from the AMD processor's higher thread count and newer memory subsystem.

Integer math performance tells a similar story: the AMD chip delivers 127573 versus 80396 for Intel, a 58.7% advantage. Multithread performance in PassMark shows 36402 against 23975, a 51.8% delta, while data encryption lands at 51.3% (22929 versus 15155). Floating point math trails slightly at 35.9% (80023 versus 58905), but remains a clear win. Prime number finding shows a 33.3% margin (136 versus 102), and the Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows 3234 versus 2360, a 37% difference.

Single-core results are closer but still favor AMD consistently. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 313 versus 249, a 25.7% gap. The R23 single-core test records 2054 versus 1719, a 19.5% lead. PassMark single-thread scores show 4050 versus 3782, a 7.1% margin, which represents the narrowest win in the entire comparison. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows 19095 versus 15764, a 21.1% delta, while the PassMark physics test shows the smallest multi-threaded gap at 11.1% (1915 versus 1723).

The overall average benchmark score reinforces this dominance: AMD's 56306 average places it at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while Intel's 31483 average sits at the 82nd percentile. The delta between their average scores is roughly 79% in AMD's favor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. AMD uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, codenamed Gorgon Point, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel uses the older Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process, codenamed Raptor Lake-H, part of the Core 7 Raptor Lake Refresh generation.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The AMD processor provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel offers 10 cores and 16 threads. This 2-core and 8-thread advantage explains much of the multi-threaded benchmark gap. Both chips boost to 5.20 GHz, but their base clocks differ: AMD runs at 2.00 GHz, Intel at 2.50 GHz. The lower AMD base clock is offset by the higher thread count and newer architecture.

Cache hierarchies show different design philosophies. Both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core. AMD provides 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core, giving Intel a per-core L2 advantage. However, AMD's total L3 cache is 16 MB, while Intel offers 24 MB of shared L3, a 50% larger pool. Despite Intel's larger cache, AMD's architectural efficiency wins in practice across all measured workloads.

Memory support differs in scope. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel access and a measured memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but the database records no memory bandwidth figure for it. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

PCIe capabilities also diverge. AMD provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe standard on Intel offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD's higher lane count may benefit certain configurations.

Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses the Radeon 890M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 64 execution units. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so the comparison is limited to processor compute.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 records an average benchmark score of 56306, placing it at the 92nd percentile. The Intel Core 7 240H averages 31483, placing it at the 82nd percentile.

Q: How much faster is the AMD chip in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD processor scores 19095, while Intel scores 15764, giving AMD a 21.1% advantage in that test.

Q: What is the closest benchmark result between the two?

A: The narrowest margin is in PassMark single-thread testing, where AMD scores 4050 and Intel scores 3782, a 7.1% delta. Both the single_thread and singlethread test entries record identical results.

Q: Does the Intel processor have any benchmark wins?

A: No. Across all 15 head-to-head comparisons recorded in the database, the Intel Core 7 240H records zero wins. The AMD processor wins all 15.

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

A: AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads. Intel provides 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: Intel has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while AMD has 16 MB. Intel also provides 2 MB of L2 per core versus AMD's 1 MB per core, though AMD's L1 cache allocation is identical at 80 KB per core.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 | Intel Core 7 240H |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Raptor Lake-H |

| Generation | Ryzen AI PRO 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core 7 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Cores | 12 | 10 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 890M | Iris Xe Graphics 64EU |

| Release Date | 2026-01-04 | 2024-12-17 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $502 |

| Part Number | 100-000001937 | SRQ6TQ5ML |

Both processors share the same L1 cache allocation of 80 KB per core, dual-channel memory buses, and are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). Both target the mobile market segment and remain in active production.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins in every measured category, so the use-case split is defined by the degree of its advantage rather than by any Intel victory.

For heavily parallel, throughput-oriented workloads, the AMD chip is the clear choice. Data compression, encryption, extended instructions, integer math, and multithread performance all show deltas between 51.3% and 94.1%. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration combined with the Zen 5 architecture delivers roughly 50% to 95% higher performance in these tasks. Workloads such as video encoding, scientific simulation, virtualization, and large-scale data processing would see the most benefit.

For single-threaded and lightly threaded workloads, the AMD advantage narrows but remains present. The 7.1% single-thread margin in PassMark and the 19.5% to 25.7% margins in Cinebench single-core tests indicate that AMD's Zen 5 architecture offers better per-core efficiency despite Intel's higher base clock and larger per-core L2 cache. Applications like office productivity, web browsing, and general desktop use would favor AMD, though the gap is less dramatic.

The Intel Core 7 240H's only recorded advantage is its lower TDP of 45 W compared to AMD's 28 W, meaning AMD draws less power while delivering higher performance across the board. Intel also offers PCIe Gen 5 support and a larger L3 cache, but these features do not translate into any benchmark wins in the recorded data. The Intel chip's higher launch MSRP of $502 has no performance counterpart in the measurements.

The 92nd percentile ranking for AMD versus the 82nd percentile for Intel places them in different performance tiers entirely. AMD's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 (0.1% delta), AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX (-0.4%), Intel Core i9-14900HX (0.5%), and Intel Core 7 253PQE (0.7%). Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 (0%), AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX (0%), Intel Core Ultra 5 225H (-0.1%), and Intel Core i5-13500 (-0.1%). This confirms that AMD competes against top-tier desktop and high-end mobile parts, while Intel sits alongside mid-range offerings.

The Verdict

The data presents a one-sided comparison. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins all 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 7.1% to 94.1%. Its average benchmark score of 56306 is roughly 79% higher than Intel's 31483, and its 92nd percentile ranking versus Intel's 82nd percentile reflects a full performance tier of separation.

For anyone selecting a processor for multi-threaded workloads, the AMD chip delivers roughly 50% to 70% higher performance in most parallel tasks, with the extended instructions test showing nearly double the Intel score. The 24 threads versus 16 threads, combined with the newer 4 nm Zen 5 architecture, provides a decisive advantage that no amount of Intel's larger cache or newer PCIe standard can offset in the recorded measurements.

For single-threaded workloads, the AMD chip remains ahead, though the smaller 7.1% margin in PassMark single-thread testing means the difference is less pronounced. Even so, the Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core tests show 25.7% and 19.5% leads respectively, indicating a consistent architectural superiority.

The Intel Core 7 240H would only be chosen based on factors outside the benchmark data, such as platform familiarity or specific motherboard requirements, since the database shows no performance scenario where it wins. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 is the stronger processor in every measured dimension, from raw compute to power efficiency, given its lower 28 W TDP alongside higher scores.