AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 vs Intel Processor 300T Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare between the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 and the Intel Processor 300T?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T is equipped with only 2 cores and 4 threads. This is a sixfold difference in core count and a sixfold difference in thread count, which fundamentally separates the two processors in terms of parallel workload capability.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each processor in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 sits in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, indicating it outperforms the vast majority of recorded processors. The Intel Processor 300T sits in the 50th percentile, meaning it lands exactly at the median of the database's recorded CPUs.

Q: Does the Intel Processor 300T have any benchmark scores listed in the database?

A: No. The database contains no benchmark scores for the Intel Processor 300T. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its nearest rivals list is empty, so there is no measured performance data to compare directly against the AMD part.

Q: What are the clock speed specifications for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Processor 300T has a base clock of 3.40 GHz but no boost clock recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Processor 300T uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The AMD part's smaller node is a key factor in its higher transistor density and efficiency profile.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel Processor 300T has a TDP of 35 watts. Despite the AMD part having six times the cores, it is rated for a lower thermal envelope.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 and the Intel Processor 300T come from entirely different architectural lineages. The AMD part is based on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Gorgon Point, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Processor 300T, by contrast, uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-S, manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 163 mm².

The cache hierarchy reveals major differences beyond raw core counts. Both processors list 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache differs: the AMD chip has 1 MB per core, while the Intel chip has 1.25 MB per core. L3 cache is where the gap widens significantly. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 has 16 MB of L3 cache, whereas the Intel Processor 300T has only 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, but it does not support ECC memory, and the database records no memory bandwidth figure for it.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The AMD chip uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel chip uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are also distinct: the AMD part carries a Radeon 890M, while the Intel part carries UHD Graphics 710.

Market segments are different. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 is a mobile processor using AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel Processor 300T is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part was released on 2026-01-04, while the Intel part was released earlier on 2024-01-07. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain a direct head-to-head benchmark set for these two processors. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the recorded win counts for both sides are zero. This means a direct per-test comparison cannot be performed from the recorded data.

However, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 has a full suite of PassMark benchmark scores, and its average benchmark score is 74496. The Intel Processor 300T has an average benchmark score of 0 due to missing data. The AMD part's individual scores show a broad range of performance across workload types. In PassMark data compression, it scores 461650. In data encryption, it scores 23132. Extended instructions score 31969, and find prime numbers scores 130. Floating point math scores 79887, integer math scores 126829, and multithread scores 36487. Physics scores 1877, random string sorting scores 48894, and single-thread scores 4301. The single-thread score is recorded twice with the same value of 4301.

The AMD part's percentile ranking of 94 places it well above the median, and its nearest rivals in the database confirm its position. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X has an average score of 74640, which is 0.2% higher than the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9745 scores 74761, 0.4% higher. The AMD EPYC 4545P scores 75373, 1.2% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 75488, 1.3% higher. These deltas show the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 operating within 1.3% of a group of much higher-end desktop and server parts, which indicates that its multithreaded performance sits at a very competitive level despite being a mobile processor.

Since the Intel Processor 300T has no recorded benchmark scores, no quantitative head-to-head comparison is possible. The data gap means the Intel part cannot be positioned against the AMD part on any measured workload, and any statement about relative performance would require outside information, which is not permitted here.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

Core and thread counts: the AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Clock speeds: the AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no recorded boost clock.

TDP: the AMD part is rated at 28 watts, the Intel part at 35 watts.

Socket: the AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700.

Architecture and codename: the AMD part uses Zen 5 with the codename Gorgon Point, the Intel part uses Raptor Lake with the codename Raptor Lake-S.

Generation: the AMD part belongs to Ryzen AI PRO 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), the Intel part belongs to Intel Processor (Raptor Lake).

Process node and foundry: the AMD part is 4 nm at TSMC, the Intel part is 10 nm at Intel.

Die size: the AMD die is 233 mm², the Intel die is 163 mm².

Cache: L1 is 80 KB per core for both. L2 is 1 MB per core for AMD and 1.25 MB per core for Intel. L3 is 16 MB for AMD and 6 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support: the AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD and not recorded for Intel. ECC memory is supported on AMD and not on Intel.

PCIe: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics: the AMD part uses Radeon 890M, the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 710.

Market segment: the AMD part is mobile, the Intel part is desktop.

Release date: the AMD part was released on 2026-01-04, the Intel part on 2024-01-07.

Launch MSRP: the Intel Processor 300T has a launch MSRP of $82. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Part number: the AMD part is 100-000001683, the Intel part is SRN3K.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 wins on multithreaded capability by a wide margin on paper. Its 12 cores and 24 threads give it a structural advantage in any workload that scales with core count, such as data compression, encryption, physics simulation, and integer math. The recorded PassMark scores for the AMD part confirm strong performance in these areas, with a multithread score of 36487 and an integer math score of 126829. Its 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that its measured performance places it in the top tier of the database, and its nearest rivals are all high-end desktop or server-class processors. The AMD part also wins on memory bandwidth, with a recorded 89.6 GB/s, and on ECC memory support, which the Intel part lacks. Its lower TDP of 28 watts, despite having six times the cores, gives it an efficiency advantage in the recorded specifications. The smaller 4 nm process node also favors the AMD part in terms of manufacturing technology.

The Intel Processor 300T wins on clock speed at base frequency, with 3.40 GHz compared to 2.00 GHz for the AMD part. Its higher base clock could benefit lightly threaded tasks that depend on single-core frequency, although no boost clock or benchmark scores are recorded to confirm this. The Intel part also wins on PCIe generation, using Gen 5 with 16 lanes compared to Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the AMD part. Its L2 cache per core is slightly larger at 1.25 MB per core versus 1 MB per core, and its die size is smaller at 163 mm² versus 233 mm². The Intel part supports DDR4 memory in addition to DDR5, which gives it broader memory compatibility with older platforms. It also has a recorded launch MSRP of $82, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, though pricing considerations are outside the scope of this analysis. The Intel part is a desktop processor, so it wins in the context of desktop socket compatibility with Intel Socket 1700, whereas the AMD part is a mobile processor using AMD Socket FP8.

The data supports a clear split: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 is positioned for heavily multithreaded mobile workloads with high performance per watt, while the Intel Processor 300T is a lower-core-count desktop part with a high base clock and newer PCIe connectivity. Without recorded benchmarks for the Intel part, the database cannot quantify its actual performance, but the specification differences alone establish distinct roles for each processor.