AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 vs Intel Xeon 634 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 and the Intel Xeon 634 is unusually clean. The AMD part wins 5 of the 15 head-to-head tests, while the Intel part takes 10. But the distribution of those wins tells a far more interesting story than the raw count. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 dominates in single-threaded PassMark tests, integer math, and random string sorting. The Intel Xeon 634 counters with overwhelming victories in Cinebench multi-core and single-core workloads, plus most PassMark compute tasks.

The most striking pattern is that the Xeon 634 wins by enormous margins in Cinebench. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part scores 31950 against the AMD's 19095, a 40.2% advantage. The single-core gap is even more pronounced in R23, with the Xeon 634 at 4510 versus 2054, a 54.5% lead. These are not close contests. The AMD chip cannot bridge that gap in any rendering-style workload.

Conversely, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 shows its strength in integer-heavy and memory-latency-sensitive tasks. In PassMark integer math, the AMD scores 127573 versus 117664, an 8.4% win. Random string sorting goes to AMD at 48824 versus 47016, a 3.8% margin. The AMD part also wins PassMark single-thread at 4050 versus 3567, a 13.5% advantage. That single-thread PassMark result is notable because the Xeon wins Cinebench single-core so decisively. The two benchmarks measure different aspects of single-core performance, and the data reflects that.

The Xeon 634 takes the remaining PassMark categories: data compression by 3.5%, data encryption by 2.2%, extended instructions by 14.4%, find prime numbers by 30.6%, floating point math by 14.5%, multithread by 3.2%, and physics by 14.9%. The prime number finding gap is the largest of these at 30.6%, suggesting the Xeon's architecture handles that particular workload far better. The multithread PassMark test is close at only 3.2%, which is surprising given the massive Cinebench R23 multi-core gap. Different multi-threaded workloads clearly reward different architectural traits.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the codename Gorgon Point. It belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel Xeon 634 uses Granite Rapids architecture on Intel's 5 nm process, and it belongs to the Xeon 600 generation, specifically Granite Rapids-WS. The process node difference is small in name, 4 nm versus 5 nm, but the philosophical gap is wide.

Both chips have 12 cores and 24 threads, so the core count does not explain the benchmark differences. The cache hierarchies are quite different. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 48 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches on the Xeon likely contribute to its strong Cinebench scores, while the AMD's smaller cache footprint is offset by its higher boost clock.

Clock speeds tell a complementary story. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Xeon 634 has a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz but a lower boost clock at 4.60 GHz. The AMD's 0.6 GHz boost advantage helps explain its PassMark single-thread win, while the Xeon's higher base clock and larger caches help in sustained multi-threaded workloads.

The platforms diverge sharply. AMD uses Socket FP8, a mobile-oriented socket, with a 28 W TDP. Intel uses Socket 4710, a server/workstation socket, with a 150 W TDP. The thermal envelope difference is enormous, and it directly explains why the Xeon can sustain such high multi-core performance. The AMD part is also a mobile segment chip, while the Xeon is explicitly a Server/Workstation part.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR5 with a quad-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. That is more than double the memory bandwidth, which feeds the Xeon's multi-core and floating point advantages. Both support ECC memory, a rarity for the AMD mobile part.

PCIe connectivity also differs substantially. The AMD chip provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel chip provides Gen 5 with 80 lanes. The Intel part also has a 598 mm² die size versus the AMD's 233 mm², a reflection of the Xeon's workstation-scale integration. The AMD part integrates Radeon 890M graphics, whereas the Intel Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. The AMD chip's multiplier is locked, while the Intel chip's multiplier is unlocked.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 has an average benchmark score of 56306, while the Intel Xeon 634 has 52974. The AMD part also sits at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, one point above the Xeon's 91st percentile.

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

A: The Intel Xeon 634 scores 31950, which is 40.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470's 19095. This is the single largest multi-core gap in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the AMD chip win any single-threaded tests?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 wins PassMark single-thread with 4050 against the Xeon's 3567, a 13.5% margin. However, the Xeon wins Cinebench R23 single-core at 4510 versus 2054, a 54.5% lead.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: The AMD chip supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports quad-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 and the Intel Xeon 634 list ECC memory support as true.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 has integrated graphics, specifically the Radeon 890M. The Intel Xeon 634 has no integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The two processors share core and thread counts, but nearly every other specification differs. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Xeon 634 has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The TDP difference is dramatic: 28 W for the AMD part versus 150 W for the Intel part.

The AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP8 and the Zen 5 architecture with the Gorgon Point codename. The Intel chip uses Intel Socket 4710 and the Granite Rapids architecture with the Granite Rapids codename. The process nodes differ at 4 nm for AMD and 5 nm for Intel. The die sizes are 233 mm² for AMD and 598 mm² for Intel.

Cache configurations differ across all levels. The AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB L3. The Intel part has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 48 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 and LPDDR5X for AMD versus DDR5 only for Intel. The memory bus is dual-channel for AMD and quad-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s.

PCIe support is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD and Gen 5 with 80 lanes for Intel. The AMD part has integrated Radeon 890M graphics; the Intel part has none. The market segments differ as Mobile for AMD and Server/Workstation for Intel. The AMD multiplier is locked, while the Intel multiplier is unlocked. The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon 634 is $499; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for the Intel Xeon 634 is Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 4510 against the AMD's 2054, a 54.5% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. The second largest is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Xeon leads 31950 to 19095, a 40.2% margin. These two results alone establish the Xeon as the dominant rendering processor.

The Xeon also wins Cinebench R15 single-core at 454 versus 313, a 31.1% lead, and Cinebench R15 multi-core at 3220 versus 3234, a narrow 0.4% margin that actually goes to AMD. That R15 multi-core result is the closest of any test. The Xeon's wins in PassMark find prime numbers (196 versus 136, a 30.6% lead), physics (2250 versus 1915, a 14.9% lead), floating point math (93564 versus 80023, a 14.5% lead), and extended instructions (38320 versus 32803, a 14.4% lead) round out its dominance in compute-heavy tasks.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470's biggest win is PassMark single-thread at 4050 versus 3567, a 13.5% margin. It also wins PassMark integer math at 127573 versus 117664, an 8.4% lead, and PassMark random string sorting at 48824 versus 47016, a 3.8% margin. The AMD part wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by a hair at 3234 versus 3220, a 0.4% margin, which is its only Cinebench victory.

The Xeon's wins in data compression (477924 versus 461195, 3.5%), data encryption (23451 versus 22929, 2.2%), and PassMark multithread (37589 versus 36402, 3.2%) are moderate but consistent. Across the 15 tested workloads, the Xeon wins 10 and AMD wins 5. The pattern is clear: the Xeon dominates CPU-intensive rendering and floating point tasks, while AMD wins in single-threaded PassMark, integer math, and string sorting.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different intended use cases. The Intel Xeon 634 is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering and floating point workloads. Its 40.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 54.5% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core are decisive. The Xeon's 150 W TDP and quad-channel memory bandwidth at 204.8 GB/s provide the sustained performance headroom for those tasks. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and AMD EPYC 7313P, with an average benchmark score of 52974 and a 91st percentile ranking.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 is the better fit for mobile platforms and workloads that favor integer math, string sorting, and PassMark single-thread performance. Its 13.5% win in PassMark single-thread and 8.4% win in integer math show real strengths. The 28 W TDP and integrated Radeon 890M graphics make it a self-contained mobile solution. Its average benchmark score of 56306 places it at the 92nd percentile, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX, and Intel Core i9-14900HX.

For workstation users who need maximum rendering throughput, the Xeon 634 is the obvious pick from this data. For mobile users who need a balanced single-threaded performer with integrated graphics and low power draw, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 is the better match. The 10-5 win count in favor of the Xeon reflects its dominance in the most demanding compute tests, but the AMD chip's wins in several everyday workloads and its far lower TDP make it the more versatile mobile option. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload prioritizes rendering and floating point math or integer performance and power efficiency.