AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 vs Intel Core i5-14600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a clear split: Intel Core i5-14600 wins 9 of the 15 direct comparisons, while AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 takes 6. The margins tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The Intel part's largest victory comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 4300 against AMD's 2054, a 52.2% advantage. That is a dominant gap, not a marginal one. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 single-core: Intel scores 433 versus 313, a 27.7% lead. These two results alone establish Intel's clear superiority in lightly threaded, clock-sensitive workloads.

Multi-core Cinebench flips the narrative partially. In R23 multi-core, Intel scores 30464 versus AMD's 19095, a 37.3% margin. But in R15 multi-core, AMD actually wins, scoring 3234 against Intel's 3070, a 5.3% edge. The R23 result likely reflects Intel's higher sustained power envelope and 14 cores, while the R15 result shows AMD's Zen 5 efficiency at lower thermal limits. The discrepancy between the two Cinebench versions suggests the AMD chip's advantage shrinks as the workload lengthens.

PassMark results reveal where each architecture excels. AMD dominates integer math: 127573 versus 117078, a 9% lead. Extended instructions show an even larger gap: 32803 versus 25674, a 27.8% advantage for AMD. Data compression also favors AMD, 461195 versus 434620, a 6.1% margin. These are compute-heavy tasks that benefit from AMD's Zen 5 core design.

Intel counters in floating-point math, scoring 85759 against AMD's 80023, a 6.7% lead. Physics simulation also goes Intel's way: 2330 versus 1915, a 17.8% margin. Data encryption favors Intel by 8.6%, and prime number finding by 12.3%. Single-thread PassMark scores are close: Intel leads 4167 to 4050, only a 2.8% gap, unlike the huge Cinebench single-core delta.

The multithread PassMark score is nearly tied: AMD at 36402, Intel at 35848, a 1.5% AMD edge. Random string sorting also goes to AMD by 1.6%. The aggregate picture: Intel wins decisively in single-core Cinebench and multi-core R23, while AMD wins in several compute-heavy PassMark sub-tests and holds its own in multithreaded throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 233 mm². Intel uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process, with a larger die at 257 mm². The process node difference alone explains much of the power and efficiency gap.

Core counts differ: AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel has 14 cores and 20 threads. Intel's extra two cores do not translate into more threads because of its hybrid design, which combines performance and efficiency cores. AMD's uniform 12-core, 24-thread configuration with simultaneous multithreading provides more thread capacity per core.

Cache structures diverge significantly. Both share 80 KB of L1 per core. AMD allocates 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core. Intel's shared L3 cache is 24 MB, compared to AMD's 16 MB. The larger per-core L2 on Intel helps in workloads with high data locality, while AMD's smaller but faster L3 may favor different access patterns.

Memory support differs. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with dual-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no bandwidth figure is recorded. ECC memory is supported by both, which is notable for a mobile chip like AMD and a desktop chip like Intel.

PCIe generations differ: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. That gives Intel a bandwidth advantage for future expansion, though current peripherals rarely saturate Gen 4.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses Radeon 890M, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. The database does not provide comparative graphics benchmarks, so the analysis must rely on architectural positioning: AMD's Radeon 890M is designed for mobile APU performance, while Intel's UHD 770 targets basic desktop output.

Market segments diverge: AMD is a mobile processor on Socket FP8, Intel is a desktop processor on Socket 1700. This shapes every practical consideration, from cooling to power delivery. AMD's TDP is 28 watts, Intel's is 65 watts. The Intel part consumes more than double the power budget, which directly explains its higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score.

Release dates differ by nearly two years: AMD launched on 2026-01-04, Intel on 2024-01-07. The AMD chip is newer by roughly two years, which explains its access to a smaller process node and newer Zen 5 architecture. Intel's Raptor Lake Refresh is a mature design on an older process.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core Cinebench score?

A: Intel Core i5-14600 scores 4300 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 scores 2054, a 52.2% difference. The Intel chip wins this test decisively.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: Intel scores 30464, AMD scores 19095, giving Intel a 37.3% lead. However, in Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD wins by 5.3% (3234 versus 3070), suggesting the gap depends on workload duration and power limits.

Q: Which processor performs better in PassMark integer math?

A: AMD scores 127573, Intel scores 117078, a 9% advantage for AMD. This indicates AMD's Zen 5 architecture handles integer-heavy computation more efficiently.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: AMD has a TDP of 28 watts, Intel has a TDP of 65 watts. This is a 37-watt difference, which explains Intel's higher sustained multi-core performance but also its greater cooling requirements.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, all with dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: AMD has 24 threads from 12 cores, Intel has 20 threads from 14 cores. AMD's uniform core design with simultaneous multithreading yields more threads despite fewer physical cores.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear distinction. Intel Core i5-14600 is the stronger choice for single-threaded performance and long-duration multi-core workloads, as shown by its 52.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 37.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Intel chip also wins in floating-point math, physics simulation, data encryption, and prime number finding. Its 65-watt TDP enables higher sustained clocks and greater throughput in power-unconstrained desktop environments.

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins in integer math, extended instructions, data compression, multithread PassMark, and random string sorting. Its 28-watt TDP makes it far more efficient per watt, a critical factor for mobile systems on Socket FP8. The AMD chip also benefits from a newer 4 nm process, which explains its ability to match or beat Intel in several compute workloads despite a much lower power envelope.

For desktop users with adequate cooling and power delivery, Intel's 14-core, 20-thread configuration with 24 MB of L3 cache and Gen 5 PCIe offers superior peak performance. For mobile users prioritizing battery life and portability, AMD's 12-core, 24-thread design with 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and Radeon 890M graphics represents a more balanced package. The Intel chip sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, the AMD chip in the 92nd, indicating AMD's overall competitive position despite losing several head-to-head tests.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 | Intel Core i5-14600 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 14 |

| Threads | 24 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

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

| Die Size | 233 mm² | 257 mm² |

| 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 |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 890M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-01-04 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $255 |

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-14600 wins in single-core Cinebench tests by wide margins: 27.7% in R15 and 52.2% in R23. These results indicate superior per-thread performance, likely from higher base clocks (2.70 GHz versus 2.00 GHz) and a larger L2 cache per core. Intel also wins in floating-point math (6.7%), data encryption (8.6%), prime number finding (12.3%), and physics simulation (17.8%). These are workloads that respond to raw clock speed and cache bandwidth.

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins in integer math (9%), extended instructions (27.8%), data compression (6.1%), multithread PassMark (1.5%), and random string sorting (1.6%). These wins suggest Zen 5's instruction-level efficiency and the benefit of 24 threads over 20. AMD also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 5.3%, a result that indicates strong performance at lower power draw.

The use-case split follows the power envelope. Intel's 65-watt TDP suits desktop systems with robust cooling, where sustained multi-core loads like Cinebench R23 can push the 14 cores to their limits. AMD's 28-watt TDP fits thin-and-light laptops, where the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and 12-core design deliver competitive throughput without excessive heat. The 4 nm TSMC process gives AMD a density advantage, while Intel's 10 nm process requires more power for similar performance.

For workloads that mix integer and extended instructions, such as compression or scientific computing, AMD's architecture shows clear advantages. For workloads dominated by floating-point math or single-thread latency, Intel's higher per-core clocks and larger L2 cache deliver better results. The choice reduces to power budget versus peak performance, with AMD optimizing for efficiency and Intel optimizing for raw speed.