AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 vs Intel Processor U301L Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 and Intel Processor U301L occupy different tiers of the mobile processor market, and the recorded data confirms a substantial performance gap. The AMD part, a 12-core Zen 5 design, sits in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part, a 5-core Raptor Lake chip, sits in the 50th percentile. The database shows no head-to-head benchmark results, and the Intel part has no individual benchmark scores recorded. The analysis below relies on the AMD processor’s measured scores, its percentile placement, and the architectural specifications of both parts.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 is for users who require high multithreaded throughput and strong single-thread performance in a mobile package. Its 92nd percentile ranking places it among the top tier of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 56306. The nearest rivals for this processor include the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 (average score 56273, 0.1% behind), the Intel Core i9-14900HX (average score 56004, 0.5% ahead), and the Intel Core 7 253PQE (average score 55919, 0.7% ahead). This clustering shows the AMD part competes directly with high-end mobile and even some workstation-class chips.

The Intel Processor U301L, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of zero. Its 50th percentile placement means it sits at the median of all CPUs, which is a middling position. The processor has 5 cores and 6 threads, a base clock of 1.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 2.20 GHz. This configuration suits basic productivity, light multitasking, and tasks that do not scale beyond a few threads. For workloads requiring heavy parallel processing, the AMD part is the clear choice based on its core count and clock rates alone.

Users who prioritize low power consumption may lean toward the Intel part, as it has a 15 W TDP compared to the AMD part’s 28 W TDP. However, the AMD processor delivers 12 cores and 24 threads, which offer far greater parallel capacity. The Intel part’s 6 threads limit its ability to handle simultaneous heavy tasks. The data shows no scenario where the Intel part outperforms the AMD part, as there are no benchmark scores for the Intel chip. Therefore, the verdict is straightforward: the AMD processor serves demanding workloads, while the Intel processor serves entry-level mobile systems.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 is built on a 4 nm TSMC process node, with the Zen 5 architecture and the codename Gorgon Point. Its generation is listed as Ryzen AI PRO 400, specifically combining Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The die size is 233 mm². The Intel Processor U301L uses Intel’s 10 nm process node, the Raptor Lake architecture, and the codename Raptor Lake-PS. Its generation is listed as Intel Processor, under the Raptor Lake family.

Core counts differ sharply. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel part has 5 cores and 6 threads. Cache configurations also diverge. The AMD part provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part’s L3 cache is double the Intel part’s.

Memory support differs. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, with a dual-channel memory bus and a measured memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, also with a dual-channel bus, but no ECC support is listed. The database does not record a memory bandwidth figure for the Intel chip.

PCIe lanes also vary. The AMD part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. This difference affects expansion capabilities for GPUs or fast storage. The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part uses Radeon 890M, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 64EU. The AMD part’s socket is AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700.

Production status for both is active. The AMD part has a release date of 2026-01-04, while the Intel part has a release date of 2024-04-07. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins in all recorded performance categories, but the database only contains benchmarks for this part. The recorded scores show strengths in specific workloads. In Cinebench R23, the AMD part scores 19095 in multicore and 2054 in single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3234 in multicore and 313 in single-core. These results indicate strong rendering performance in both multithreaded and single-threaded tasks.

PassMark results further break down the AMD part’s capabilities. The processor scores 127573 in integer math, 80023 in floating point math, and 32803 in extended instructions. These figures show robust arithmetic and instruction-level performance. Data compression scores 461195, which is a high number, while data encryption scores 22929. Random string sorting scores 48824. The processor also scores 36402 in PassMark multithread and 4050 in single-thread (listed twice as passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread). Physics score is 1915, and find prime numbers score is 136.

The Intel Processor U301L has no recorded wins because no benchmark scores exist. Its architectural parameters suggest a different role. With a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 2.20 GHz, it will deliver lower peak throughput than the AMD part’s 2.00 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost. The Intel part’s 15 W TDP indicates a focus on efficiency, but the data does not include any efficiency benchmarks. For any compute-heavy workload, the AMD part’s higher clock rates, more cores, and larger cache make it the superior choice based on recorded data.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470?

A: The average benchmark score is 56306, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the Intel Processor U301L have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark results for this processor, and its average benchmark score is zero.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD processor has a TDP of 28 W, and the Intel processor has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor U301L does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for the Intel Processor U301L?

A: The launch MSRP is $107. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results for these two processors. The AMD part has individual scores across multiple tests, while the Intel part has none. This absence of direct comparison data means the analysis relies on the AMD part’s absolute scores and the Intel part’s lack thereof.

The AMD part’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 19095 indicates strong performance for rendering and video encoding. Its single-core score of 2054 shows capable per-thread performance. In Cinebench R15, the multicore score of 3234 and single-core score of 313 follow the same pattern. These scores are useful for gauging the AMD part’s position, but without Intel scores, a direct delta cannot be computed.

PassMark tests provide more granular data. The integer math score of 127573 suggests strong general-purpose computing. Floating point math at 80023 supports scientific and engineering workloads. Data compression at 461195 is a notable figure for archival tasks, while encryption at 22929 covers security-related operations. The extended instructions score of 32803 indicates good SIMD and vector processing. Random string sorting at 48824 reflects sorting algorithms, and physics at 1915 relates to simulation workloads.

The AMD part’s single-thread score of 4050 in PassMark is high, consistent with its 5.20 GHz boost clock. The find prime numbers score of 136 is relatively low, which may indicate a weakness in certain prime-generation algorithms. The multithread score of 36402 aligns with the 12-core, 24-thread configuration.

Given that the Intel part has no scores, the head-to-head comparison is one-sided. The AMD part’s scores stand alone as evidence of its capabilities. The Intel part’s specifications, such as a 2.20 GHz boost clock and 6 threads, cannot match the AMD part’s throughput in any recorded metric.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field where data exists.

• Manufacturer: AMD versus Intel.
• Cores: 12 versus 5.
• Threads: 24 versus 6.
• Base clock: 2.00 GHz versus 1.20 GHz.
• Boost clock: 5.20 GHz versus 2.20 GHz.
• TDP: 28 W versus 15 W.
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700.
• Architecture: Zen 5 versus Raptor Lake.
• Codename: Gorgon Point versus Raptor Lake-PS.
• Generation: Ryzen AI PRO 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) versus Intel Processor (Raptor Lake).
• Process node: 4 nm versus 10 nm.
• Foundry: TSMC versus Intel.
• Die size: 233 mm² versus not listed.
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core for both.
• L2 cache: 1 MB per core versus 1.25 MB per core.
• L3 cache: 16 MB versus 8 MB shared.
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5.
• Memory bus: Dual-channel for both.
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s versus not listed.
• ECC memory: Supported versus not supported.
• PCIe: Gen 4, 16 lanes versus Gen 4, 8 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 890M versus UHD Graphics 64EU.
• Market segment: Mobile for both.
• Production status: Active for both.
• Release date: 2026-01-04 versus 2024-04-07.
• Launch MSRP: Not listed versus $107.
• Multiplier unlocked: False for both.
• Part number: 100-000001937 versus SRPKFQ5CW.

The core and thread differences are the most significant. The AMD part has over double the cores and four times the threads. The clock speed advantage is also large, with the AMD part boosting to 5.20 GHz compared to the Intel part’s 2.20 GHz. The cache difference, particularly L3, favors the AMD part. The process node difference, 4 nm versus 10 nm, explains the AMD part’s higher transistor density and efficiency potential.

The Intel part’s only clear advantages are lower TDP and support for DDR4 memory, which may suit older or more power-constrained systems. The AMD part lacks DDR4 support but offers LPDDR5X, which is common in modern mobile devices. The PCIe lane difference, 16 versus 8, gives the AMD part more headroom for discrete GPUs or multiple NVMe drives.

The integrated graphics differ in branding, but the database does not provide performance scores for either GPU. The AMD part’s Radeon 890M is paired with a 12-core CPU, while the Intel part’s UHD Graphics 64EU serves a 5-core CPU. The production status for both is active, meaning both are currently available in the market.

The release dates show the Intel part launched earlier, in April 2024, while the AMD part is dated January 2026. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $107, which is a stated figure, while the AMD part has no MSRP in the database. No further pricing information is available or discussed here.