OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,070PassMark multi-core score:35081N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:5.1 GHzCPU socket:FP8TDP (Thermal design power):28 W

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 24 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370
8.2/10

Overall score

Score
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components

40%

8.3

Technical score

25%

8.5

Reviews score

25%

8.0

List score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

★Better than 97% of processors
7.2

Value for money

Value for money
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 60% of models
Score components

70%

8.2

Overall score

30%

4.9

Price

▼Worse than 60%
8.3

Technical score

Technical score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Score components

60%

8.6

Performance

18%

7.8

Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.6

Platform

1%

8.3

Integrated graphics

★Better than 91%
8.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

9.3

Popularity

Grades by review (24)
9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
★Better than 92%
8.0

List score

List score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 83 lists (1%)
▲Better than 89%
  • amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-370
amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-370
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,070
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370

Based on 8 · 18

Reviewers praise its strong CPU performance and battery life, but find the AI features underwhelming and gaming results mixed.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370

Technical score
Technical score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Score components:

60%

8.6

Performance

18%

7.8

Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.6

Platform

1%

8.3

Integrated graphics

8.3
Reviews score
8.5
List score
8.0
Value for money
Value for money
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 60% of models
Score components:

70%

8.2

Overall score

30%

4.9

Price

7.2
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
laptop
CPU socket
FP8
This processor uses the FP8 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 49.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 78.4% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
24
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 24 CPU threads, which is more than 89.7% of processors and equal to 4.4% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.1 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.1 GHz which is higher than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 2.0 GHz & 8x 2.0 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x2.0 GHz & 8x2.0 GHz which is higher than that of 73.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
35,081
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 35,081 in PassMark, which is higher than 90.3% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
4 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 4 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 86.8% of processors and equal to that of 7.7% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 4 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 4 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 86.4% of processors and equal to that of 7.8% of processors.
L3 cache
24 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 80.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
L2 cache
?
L1 cache
960 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 960 KB which is larger than that of 84.6% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR5/LPDDR5X
This processor supports DDR DDR5/LPDDR5X, which is newer than that of 91.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
8,000 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 8,000 MHz, which is higher than that of 95.9% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-8000 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-8000 MHz, which is higher than that of 96.4% of processors and equal to 1.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 256 GB of memory, which is more than 89% of processors and equal to 8.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 890M
This processor uses the Radeon 890M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 97.7% of processors and equal to that in 0.4% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
16
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 16 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 56.5% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
800 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 800 MHz which is higher than that of 86.6% of processors and equal to that of 6.3% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VP9 (HW decode)
This processor supports VP9 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 73.9% of processors and equal to 3.5% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
28 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 28 W which is lower than that of 67.9% of processors and equal to that of 7.1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
28 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 28 W which is lower than that of 67.7% of processors and equal to that of 7% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 15-54 W
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 3.06x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (35,081 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    35,081 vs 11,469
  • 2.86x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (14,888 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    14,888 vs 5,209
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Strix Point vs Kaby Lake).
    Strix Point vs Kaby Lake
  • 54.7% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,958 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,958 vs 2,558
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 69.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,596 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,596 vs 1,535
  • 15.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 26.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 92% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    9.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (24)
    9 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 15 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.5 vs 6.7
  • 4 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
    June 2024
    2024 vs 2020
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3.06x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (35,081 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    35,081 vs 11,469
  • 2.86x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (14,888 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    14,888 vs 5,209
  • 54.7% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,958 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,958 vs 2,558
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 69.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,596 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,596 vs 1,535
  • 15.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (4x2 GHz & 8x2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x2.0 GHz & 8x2.0 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Strix Point vs Kaby Lake).
    Strix Point vs Kaby Lake
  • 66.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (4 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    4 nm vs 12 nm
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    Zen 5 + Zen 5c cores
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 4 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 4 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2.5x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (960 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    960 KB vs 384 KB
  • 6.87x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (34 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    34 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 2x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2.67x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    24 MB vs 9 MB
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 4x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    256 GB vs 64 GB
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4).
    DDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4
  • 2.5x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (8,000 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    8,000 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 91% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-8000 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-8000 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Radeon 890M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Radeon 890M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 2.29x higher GPU clock speed
    This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (800 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
    800 MHz vs 350 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 37.8% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • 37.8% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 31.4% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (232.5 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    232.5 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 4.28x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is more expensive than the average processor (£1,070 vs £250).
    £1,070 vs £250
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 8 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (20 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    20 vs 28
  • 4.28x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is more expensive than the average processor (£1,070 vs £250).
    £1,070 vs £250
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 8 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (20 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    20 vs 28
  • 31.4% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (232.5 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    232.5 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
Country Boy Computers
≈ estimated
21/03/2026
Hands-on review · local AI benchmarks and NPU setup
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a strong, cheaper alternative to the top chip for local LLMs, though its NPU benefits remain unclear.
7.0
Mr. Sujano
≈ estimated
28/10/2025
Hands-on review · boot problem, fan noise and port selection
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 suits buyers who want many ports and a small chassis, but it is less compelling against cheaper rivals.
9.0
ETA PRIME
≈ estimated
20/09/2024
Hands-on test · Fluid Motion Frames 2 on integrated graphics
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 gets strong integrated graphics gains from Fluid Motion Frames 2, though the feature is still an early preview.
9.0
Josh Craves Tech
≈ estimated
16/09/2024
Hands-on review · gaming, CPU performance, battery and thermals
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has excellent CPU balance and efficiency, but the price is hard to justify and the GPU tops out at RTX 4070.
9.5
Hubwood
≈ estimated
11/08/2024
Full review · gaming, battery and everyday tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 makes an excellent all-round laptop with strong performance and battery life, though RAM is not upgradeable.
7.0
Hubwood
≈ estimated
08/08/2024
Benchmark test · 31 games at 1080p
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 delivers fairly decent integrated GPU performance, but its 128-bit memory bus holds it back.
9.0
PCWorld
≈ estimated
28/07/2024
Laptop-based testing · performance, battery and gaming results
Verdict
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 delivers solid gaming and the best overall performance here, though Snapdragon keeps the battery lead.
Not graded
Shop video
Not graded
Not graded
Brand video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
phoronix.com
≈ estimated
28/07/2024
Lab test · Linux performance
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a strong Zen 5 chip for Linux, but its graphics need recent kernel and driver updates to work properly.
8.0
indiatoday.in
✓ explicit
19/03/2025
Hands-on test · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a powerful, efficient chip for gaming laptops, giving around nine hours of light use, though its fan can get loud.
8.5
kitguru.net
✓ explicit
28/07/2024
Lab test · Laptop efficiency
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 gives the Zenbook S 16 OLED strong battery life and efficient performance, though the trackpad and flexing chassis let it down.
8.0
storagereview.com
≈ estimated
14/11/2025
Lab test · Workstation laptop
Verdict
The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 PRO suits the Dell Pro Max 16 for long number-crunching jobs, but trails Intel in GPU and multi-core tests.
9.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
28/07/2024
Lab test · Laptop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 gives strong multi-core speed at low power, but its graphics clock falls well short of AMD's rated figure at 33W.
7.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
03/09/2024
Lab test · Gaming power limits
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 needs a 51 W power limit to reach its rated Radeon 890M clock, gaining about 10 to 20% over the previous generation.
9.0
pcmasters.de
✓ explicit
22/01/2026
Hands-on test · Mini PC
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 powers the compact Sapphire EDGE AI mini PC, a well-built machine that ships without RAM or SSD.
9.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
28/07/2024
Lab test · Laptop CPU and GPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a fast, efficient laptop chip whose Zen 5 cores lead on single-core speed, though its AI performance is still unproven against Intel.
8.5
hardzone.es
✓ explicit
10/03/2026
Lab test · Laptop benchmarks
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a fast laptop chip for everyday work and light gaming, though the test unit's cooling fault held back its multi-core score.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370

  • Exceptional multi-threaded performance with a 12-core/24-thread Zen 5 hybrid architecture.
  • Class-leading integrated graphics performance via the Radeon 890M (RDNA 3.5), capable of smooth 1080p gaming.
  • High-performance Neural Processing Unit (NPU) with 50 TOPS, providing significant acceleration for local AI tasks.
  • Excellent power efficiency and 'power-to-performance' ratio, leading to longer battery life in many systems.
  • Significant improvements in performance and efficiency over previous generations like the Ryzen 9 8945HS.

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370

  • High-end laptops and mini PCs featuring this processor can be relatively expensive.
  • Fans can become quite loud and noticeable when the system is under heavy computational load.
  • Performance may be limited by thermal throttling in thinner laptop designs or compact mini PCs.
  • Mixed user reports regarding software stability, including occasional BSODs and Wi-Fi driver issues in certain laptop models.
  • Hybrid core configuration (4 Zen 5 + 8 Zen 5c) may introduce latency penalties in specific multi-core workloads.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is a high-performance 'Strix Point' processor built on a 4nm TSMC process, featuring a hybrid architecture of 12 cores (4 Zen 5 and 8 Zen 5c) and 24 threads with a max boost clock of 5.1 GHz. Key characteristics include a powerful XDNA 2 NPU delivering 50 TOPS for AI tasks and integrated Radeon 890M graphics with 16 RDNA 3.5 compute units. Main pros include industry-leading integrated graphics performance capable of 1080p gaming, a configurable TDP of 15–54W for exceptional energy efficiency, and a significant 16% IPC improvement over previous generations. Cons include high operating temperatures of up to 100°C under heavy loads, a lack of PCIe 5.0 support, and the tendency for systems to use non-upgradeable soldered LPDDR5X-8000 memory to achieve maximum bandwidth.

Compare AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and other processors

No results found