AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 vs Intel Core i9-14900F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture. The Intel Core i9-14900F wins 14 of the 15 recorded comparisons, and the margins are often substantial. The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 39,551 against AMD's 19,095, a delta of -51.7%. That is more than double the AMD result. The single-core Cinebench R23 run shows an even larger relative gap: Intel at 5,583 versus AMD at 2,054, a -63.2% difference. Cinebench R15 follows the same pattern, with Intel ahead by -18.9% in multi-core (3,986 vs 3,234) and -44.3% in single-core (562 vs 313).

PassMark workloads reinforce the trend. Intel wins data compression (564,207 vs 461,195, -18.3%), data encryption (34,644 vs 22,929, -33.8%), find prime numbers (209 vs 136, -34.9%), floating point math (119,550 vs 80,023, -33.1%), integer math (177,066 vs 127,573, -28%), multithread (46,532 vs 36,402, -21.8%), physics (2,899 vs 1,915, -33.9%), and random string sorting (63,728 vs 48,824, -23.4%). The single-thread PassMark score also favors Intel, 4,506 vs 4,050, a -10.1% edge.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 secures exactly one win: PassMark extended instructions, 32,803 vs 31,084, a 5.5% advantage. That is the only recorded benchmark where the AMD part comes out ahead. The data indicates a processor designed for efficiency in mobile form factors, not for peak throughput in these particular tests. The Intel part is simply faster across nearly every measured workload class.

Looking at the wider database context, the Intel part's average benchmark score is 60,008, which places it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD part also holds a 92nd percentile ranking, with an average score of 56,306. Both sit in the same percentile tier, but the raw average score difference is about 6.6%. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (delta -0.2%) and AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX (delta -0.2%), while the AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 (delta 0.1%) and Intel Core i9-14900HX (delta 0.5%). The data shows both parts competing in the same rough performance neighborhood despite the head-to-head blowout, largely because the AMD part is a mobile chip measured against a desktop flagship.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, codenamed Gorgon Point. It belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation, which mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel Core i9-14900F uses Raptor Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, codenamed Raptor Lake-R, and belongs to the Core 14th Gen family.

Core counts differ sharply. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads. Intel provides 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel part has double the cores and a third more threads. Both parts list a base clock of 2.00 GHz, but the boost clocks diverge: AMD reaches 5.20 GHz, Intel reaches 5.80 GHz.

Cache layouts are not the same either. AMD gives 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3. Intel gives 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Intel L3 pool is more than twice the size of AMD's, and its per-core L2 is double. For workloads that fit in cache, the Intel part has a structural advantage.

Process node and foundry are notable differences. AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm node, while Intel uses its own 10 nm process. Die size also differs: AMD measures 233 mm², Intel measures 257 mm². The AMD part integrates Radeon 890M graphics, while the Intel Core i9-14900F has no integrated graphics at all. Memory support overlaps on DDR5, but AMD also supports LPDDR5X while Intel supports DDR4 as well. AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s; the Intel entry does not provide a bandwidth figure. PCIe generation differs: AMD runs Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, Intel runs Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Both support ECC memory.

The socket situation is entirely different. AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, a mobile socket. Intel uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. The market segments confirm this: AMD is listed as Mobile, Intel as Desktop. The AMD part is a 28 W TDP chip; the Intel part is 65 W TDP. The production status for both is Active. The AMD release date is 2026-01-04, the Intel release date is 2024-01-07. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $524; the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900F wins in raw compute throughput across almost every category. Multi-threaded rendering is its strongest showing: the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,551 is more than double the AMD score, which points to a clear advantage for video rendering, 3D scene compilation, and other heavily threaded production tasks. The single-core Cinebench R23 result, 5,583 vs 2,054, indicates a very large advantage in lightly threaded applications such as older games, spreadsheet recalculation, and general desktop responsiveness. PassMark integer math and floating point math both favor Intel by roughly 28% to 33%, which suggests scientific computing and numerical simulation run faster on the Intel part. Data compression and encryption also favor Intel, with deltas of -18.3% and -33.8%, respectively. The physics workload, 2,899 vs 1,915, is another Intel win, pointing to better performance in physics simulation within games and engineering tools.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins exactly one recorded test: PassMark extended instructions, 32,803 vs 31,084. That 5.5% edge indicates AMD's implementation of certain SIMD or specialized instruction paths delivers better throughput in that specific synthetic workload. It is a narrow, isolated win. The AMD part also carries integrated Radeon 890M graphics, so systems built around it do not require a discrete GPU for basic display output, whereas the Intel part has no integrated graphics. For a mobile platform, the 28 W TDP versus 65 W TDP suggests a very different thermal envelope, which matters for laptop design and battery life, though the benchmark database does not record battery or thermal tests.

The use-case split is stark. The Intel part wins where maximum compute is the goal: rendering, encoding, heavy math, and multi-threaded productivity. The AMD part wins where extended instruction throughput matters and where integrated graphics and a lower TDP are the priorities. For a desktop workstation chasing benchmark scores, the Intel part is the clear choice. For a thin-and-light mobile system, the AMD part provides a usable GPU and a much lower power draw.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two parts:

• Cores: 12 (AMD) vs 24 (Intel)
• Threads: 24 (AMD) vs 32 (Intel)
• Boost clock: 5.20 GHz (AMD) vs 5.80 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 28 W (AMD) vs 65 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 (AMD) vs Intel Socket 1700 (Intel)
• Architecture: Zen 5 (AMD) vs Raptor Lake (Intel)
• Codename: Gorgon Point (AMD) vs Raptor Lake-R (Intel)
• Generation: Ryzen AI PRO 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) (AMD) vs Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) (Intel)
• Process node: 4 nm (AMD) vs 10 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC (AMD) vs Intel (Intel)
• Die size: 233 mm² (AMD) vs 257 mm² (Intel)
• L2 cache: 1 MB per core (AMD) vs 2 MB per core (Intel)
• L3 cache: 16 MB (AMD) vs 36 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X (AMD) vs DDR4, DDR5 (Intel)
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (AMD) vs not listed (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 16 lanes (AMD) vs Gen 5, 16 lanes (Intel)
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 890M (AMD) vs N/A (Intel)
• Market segment: Mobile (AMD) vs Desktop (Intel)
• Release date: 2026-01-04 (AMD) vs 2024-01-07 (Intel)
• Launch MSRP: not listed (AMD) vs $524 (Intel)
• Part number: 100-000001937 (AMD) vs SRN3W (Intel)

Shared specifications include a 2.00 GHz base clock, 80 KB L1 per core, dual-channel memory bus, ECC support, 16 CPU PCIe lanes, locked multiplier, and Active production status. Both parts have no 3D V-Cache.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F has 24 cores and 32 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-14900F include integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel part lists N/A for integrated graphics. The AMD part includes Radeon 890M integrated graphics.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 39,551 versus AMD's 19,095, a -51.7% difference.

Q: Did the AMD part win any benchmark?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins PassMark extended instructions, 32,803 vs 31,084, a 5.5% advantage.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but not DDR4.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD part is rated at 28 W. The Intel part is rated at 65 W.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a straightforward conclusion. The Intel Core i9-14900F is the faster processor in nearly every benchmark category, with particularly large margins in multi-core and single-core Cinebench tests. Its 24 cores, 32 threads, 36 MB of shared L3, and 5.80 GHz boost clock deliver results that the AMD part cannot match in rendering, math, compression, encryption, or physics workloads. The Intel part also carries a launch MSRP of $524, which the database records as its only pricing detail.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 is a mobile processor with a 28 W TDP, integrated Radeon 890M graphics, and a 4 nm TSMC process. It wins one recorded benchmark, PassMark extended instructions, and its average benchmark score of 56,306 sits just below the Intel part's 60,008 despite both holding a 92nd percentile ranking. For a desktop system where maximum compute throughput is the goal, the Intel part is the data-supported choice. For a mobile platform needing integrated graphics and lower power draw, the AMD part is the only viable option between the two, since the Intel part is a desktop chip with no integrated GPU. The choice depends entirely on form factor and power envelope, not on raw performance, where the Intel part dominates the head-to-head results.