AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 outperforms Intel's Core Ultra 7 258V in LLM performance — Team Red provided benchmarks show a strong lead of up to 27% in LM Studio

AMD Ryzen AI 300 Series
(Image credit: AMD)

AMD claims that its Ryzen AI 300 (codenamed Strix Point) offerings can easily beat Intel's latest Core Ultra 200V (codenamed Lunar Lake) CPUs in consumer LLM workloads. Team Red has showcased several charts - comparing the performance of processors from both lineups - with AMD in front by upwards of 27%.

Since the AI boom, tech giants—both on the hardware and software fronts—have entered an arms race to outpace each other in the AI landscape. While much of this is purely for the quote-unquote "AI hype," benefits for mainstream customers are starting to materialize. Microsoft demands a minimum of 40 TOPS for any system to be considered a "Copilot+ PC." Almost every CPU manufacturer now reserves valuable silicon space for a Neural Processing Unit (NPU).

On that note, AMD says that its Strix Point APUs seemingly outperform Intel's Lunar Lake when running LLMs locally. LM Studio's typical consumer LLM is run based on the llama.cpp framework. The Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 leads the Core Ultra 7 258V by up to 27% in the CPU department. The latency benchmarks are an absolute bloodbath for Intel - with AMD reportedly delivering 3.5X lower latency in the Mistral Nemo 2407 12b Instruct model. When switching to the integrated graphics solution, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 375's Radeon 890M iGPU is, at best, 23% faster than Intel's Arc 140V.

Interestingly, while the HX 375 is the fastest Strix Point APU, the Core Ultra 7 258V is not. The flagship Core Ultra 9 288V offers a full 30W TDP, which aligns it relatively better with Strix Point since the latter can be configured as high as 54W.

That aside, AMD then tested both laptops in Intel's own and first-party AI Playground - where we see AMD in front by 13.1% using the Mistral 7b Instruct v0.3 model. The Microsoft Phi 3.1 Mini Instruct test is slightly less exciting as the lead drops to 8.7%.

AMD Intel Playground iGPU vs iGPU performance

(Image credit: AMD)

All in all, it is not every day that you fire up your laptop to run a local LLM, but who knows what the future holds? It would've been more exciting to see the kingpin Core Ultra 9 288V in action, but don't expect drastically different results. AMD says that it is actively working to make LLMs, currently gated behind many technical barriers, more accessible to everyone, which highlights the importance of projects like LM Studio.

Hassam Nasir
Contributing Writer

Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.

  • Makaveli
    I use LM Studio with my 7900 XTX its a great app.
    Reply
  • qwertymac93
    They are so proud of running their top end "AI" CPU against Intel's mid-range "AI" CPU, all while using an app that doesn't use any of the "AI" features on the CPU and runs purely on the CPU cores. Nice.
    Reply
  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    Curretly at Best Buy there is no HX 375 laptop, but the HX 370 laptops look to be around $1900 while the 258V looks to be around $1200, If AMD is touting 27% better performance of the HX 375 vs the 258V while the system costs a good 50% more (not exactly apples to apples, but a general idea of what someone would find at a given time at a given store), that's a terrible deal. Maybe TH should add some sort of standardized AI measurement to their tests instead of just Geekbench and Cinebench until there is such a thing as "NPU Mark" or "NPU Bench".

    https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/asus-zenbook-s14-review-lunar-lake-ultra-7-258v
    https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/hp-omnibook-ultra-review
    Reply
  • snarfbot
    there's only a handful of these out in the wild. in the laptops you can buy them they have either paired the models with the most powerful igpu with an Nvidia dgpu rendering it useless. or kneecapping it's performance with a combination of poor cooling (thin and light for the lose) or low tdp limits.

    why does amd even bother launching products? it's like they don't even care if they're successful or not. they apparently just like spending the money on rnd and fabs and then letting Intel and now qualcomm limp in and take the pot.
    Reply