If you’ve been trying to figure out which high-end laptop CPU truly dominates in today’s market, you’ve come to the right place. I’ve spent a solid chunk of time researching, testing, and comparing two of the most talked-about laptop processors: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H.
Below, I’ll walk you through everything from multicore rendering performance and gaming benchmarks to battery life and integrated graphics. You’ll see step-by-step highlights of important tests, glean insights on the best use-cases for each CPU, and learn which might be the better fit for your next laptop purchase.
1. A Brief Look at the Two CPUs
AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is part of AMD’s Zen 5-based lineup, officially identified as “Strix Point.” It utilizes a combination of four high-performance Zen 5 cores and eight more efficient Zen 5c cores, totaling 12 cores and 24 threads. On paper, it has a 5.1GHz max boost frequency, 24MB of L3 cache, and supports up to LPDDR5X memory around 7467 MT/s. This CPU also carries a dedicated AI engine, referred to as an NPU for accelerating machine learning tasks.
On the other side, we have the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H, known internally under the “Meteor Lake” banner. With 16 total cores, arranged as six performance (P) cores, eight efficient (E) cores, and two low-power efficient cores, the Intel chip has a 5.1GHz boost clock for its main performance cores and 24MB of Intel Smart Cache.
It also comes with integrated Intel Arc-based graphics and an NPU for AI acceleration. The CPU has up to 115W maximum turbo power and 45W default TDP.
I’ve looked closely at both chips in similarly configured 16-inch gaming laptops to ensure a fair comparison. In each, the only real difference was the processor itself, while RAM capacity, storage, screen size, battery capacity, and cooling design remained consistent. This approach helps narrow down CPU performance discrepancies.
Core Layout and Clock Speeds
AMD’s design blends 4 Zen 5 performance cores with 8 Zen 5c efficiency cores that carry hyperthreading. Meanwhile, Intel’s approach features 6 performance cores (hyperthreaded) plus 8 standard efficient cores and 2 low-power cores, but only the performance cores have hyperthreading. This leads to 24 threads total for AMD, against 22 threads for Intel.
Even though both can ramp up to 5.1GHz on a single performance core, how each chip sustains clocks across multiple threads can differ based on TDP, cooling, and design constraints. To see what that means for real-world usage, let’s dig into data for battery life, integrated graphics, power scaling, and general performance.
Why It Matters
If you’re deciding on a high-performance laptop, maybe for gaming, software development, or content creation, it’s crucial to know how each CPU handles loads. Do you want the best battery life for extended sessions away from a charger?
Or do you prefer raw performance for 3D rendering or large software compiles? Understanding these points leads you to the best CPU choice. Let’s continue by examining battery tests and how these processors fare under real workloads.
2. Battery Life and Power Efficiency
I often see laptop buyers focusing on performance in gaming or creative tasks, only to be disappointed by subpar battery life. That’s why I ran a simple test for general usage, such as streaming video. This is a common scenario for students, frequent travelers, and professionals who don’t always have access to an outlet.
Video Playback: AMD Edges Ahead
In typical scenarios, AMD laptops tend to last longer on battery than their Intel counterparts. In my comparisons, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 model lasted about 35% longer than the Core Ultra 9 185H. Both reached decent times—Intel got close to 9 hours, while AMD reached nearly 12 hours in a “light to medium load” environment. This is a big plus if you’re on the move and can’t always plug in.
To confirm, I also looked at power usage while unplugged in a more demanding scenario. If you run synthetic CPU tests off battery power, AMD’s advantage narrows a little, but it’s still in the lead.
Specifically, AMD’s laptop provided faster results (about 8% higher) in a multi-core test while on battery. Intel kept up in single-core work, but that’s a smaller slice of day-to-day tasks. So, if battery life or on-battery performance matters, the HX 370 consistently comes out on top.
Why Efficiency Matters Even for Gaming Laptops
You might think that because it’s a “gaming” or “high-performance” laptop, efficiency is less of a concern. However, if you ever need to run on battery—like a commute or a long flight—every extra hour helps.
Plus, more efficient chips generally run cooler, which can result in quieter fans or slightly better performance if the cooling system has power overhead to spare. With high-performance laptops in particular, any time you get more battery life, that’s a win.
3. Power Scaling and Thermal Design
One of my favorite tests with these processors is stepping through different power limits—like 15W, 35W, 45W, or even 80W. This reveals whether a CPU can keep scaling in performance as you feed it more power, or if it’s highly optimized for only a specific TDP window.
Multicore Power Efficiency
When locking both CPUs at 15 watts, I saw that the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 could outscore Intel by around 69% in certain CPU-rendering tests. That’s huge. Meanwhile, to reach the same performance AMD produced at 15W, Intel needed about 25W. Once you go up to 80W power limits, the performance difference narrows.
Here, AMD might only be 10% ahead rather than 39%. Still, the key story is that AMD gets more done at lower wattage, leading to quieter operation and improved longevity if the chassis is smaller or has less robust cooling.
In larger laptops that comfortably allow 80W or 90W for the CPU, Intel’s deficit shrinks. Yet the AMD chip often stays on top, especially in 3D rendering, compression, or decompression workloads. For some specialized tasks like MATLAB or certain real-world productivity suites, Intel gets an edge. But if you do CPU rendering or content creation, AMD’s extra efficiency usually wins out.
Thermal Behavior and Clock Speeds
Although the AMD CPU may sometimes display higher reported temperatures, I noticed that external chassis temperatures on the Intel laptop could be hotter to the touch. This stems from how each chip reports internal sensors and how heat spreads through the chassis. In real-world use—holding the laptop, resting palms on the keyboard—I found that the Intel variant felt warmer, even if its software readout was cooler.
When comparing CPU clock speeds, the AMD device is often reaching higher frequencies on both its Zen 5 (Performance) and Zen 5c (Efficiency) cores. Intel’s design must distribute power among more physical cores overall, which often means lower frequencies on each. At lower TDPs, AMD’s lead is more pronounced.
As we feed the CPUs more power, Intel starts to keep up. Still, for tasks like multi-threaded rendering or compression, AMD’s advantage remains consistent when both are pushed near their limits.
4. Application and Rendering Performance
Whether you’re a video editor, 3D artist, or data scientist, multicore performance can be a top buying factor. After all, we love laptops that can tackle everything from rendering a project in Blender to exporting footage in DaVinci Resolve without making you wait all day.
3D Rendering: Blender, V-Ray, Corona
In rendering benchmarks, the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 often performed 20–39% faster in certain tests at moderate TDP settings (like 35W), although Intel narrowed that margin at 80–90W. If you’re not pushing extreme power in a tiny chassis, AMD’s better efficiency means you’ll see big gains in 3D rendering and ray-tracing workloads.
Meanwhile, specialized tools like MATLAB can lean in Intel’s favor. In cross-simulation or real-world “productivity suite” benchmarks, you might see Intel winning by 9–24%. So your personal usage matters. If you’re simulating complex data sets in crossmark-like workloads, Intel might be the better performer. But if you’re looking at heavy 3D or video rendering, AMD has the upper hand.
Compression, Decompression, and Encryption
When testing tools like 7-Zip for file compression and decompression, AMD had a head start. I recorded 3–18% gains for AMD at higher TDP in the decompression category and 7–20% gains in compression.
The added Zen 5c threads really help churn through these tasks. Under 35W TDP, AMD’s advantage jumps even more. That means if your laptop is set for battery efficiency or moderate fan noise, you might see an even greater gap favoring AMD.
Video Editing: Handbrake, Adobe Premiere, DaVinci Resolve
Video editing is a big deal, so let’s break down how both CPUs handle encoding and exporting:
- Raw CPU Encoding: In Handbrake’s H.264 or H.265 CPU-based encodes, AMD often finished 7–25% faster than Intel at typical 35W or 80W settings.
- Hardware-Accelerated Rendering: Intel’s Quick Sync is extremely fast. In certain test runs, Intel could finish an encode in nearly half the time thanks to well-established support in apps like Handbrake.
- AMD’s vcn hardware acceleration is no slouch, but Quick Sync often still leads in many mainstream workflows. In DaVinci Resolve, though, AMD’s hardware acceleration performed very well, sometimes beating Intel by a healthy margin. So your app choice matters a lot.
- Adobe Premiere Pro: The gap was smaller. Sometimes AMD led by just 2–5%, especially if you aren’t heavily leveraging GPU-based rendering. Still, a “win is a win,” but these leads were more modest than in raw CPU-based encodes.
In short, if you’re constantly encoding video in an application that supports Intel’s Quick Sync thoroughly, you might get better total throughput with the Core Ultra 9 185H. However, many creative tools also optimize well for AMD, so it depends on your preferred suite. For broad strokes across Adobe or DaVinci, AMD usually wins overall or at least ties.
5. Gaming Benchmarks and Integrated Graphics
Gamers, rejoice! We’ll cover both dedicated GPU gaming and integrated GPU gaming. While laptops compared here each have their own dedicated NVIDIA GPUs in many configurations, I wanted to see how the CPUs alone handle modern titles if the dedicated GPU is switched off. This matters for smaller ultraportables or times you just don’t want to power up a big graphics chip on battery.
Discrete GPU Gaming: It’s a Tie for Most Titles
With the same GPU and same memory capacity, these laptops produced nearly identical results in about 20 tested games. In some titles, Intel had a small lead (+8% in one or two games), while AMD was significantly ahead (+10% or more) in others.
But once everything was averaged, the difference was under 2–3% in 1080p or 1440p, a margin that barely matters for real-world gaming. That’s great news. You can choose whichever is cheaper or has the cooler design.
For total system latency in competitive shooters, Intel sometimes showed a tiny advantage. But the difference was negligible—both were very responsive, with minimal input lag.
Unless you have a very specific game that’s heavily optimized for one CPU, the overall experience is so close you won’t even notice the difference at normal or high resolutions. At 1080p or 1440p, you’re more likely to be GPU-bound anyway.
Integrated GPU Performance: AMD’s Big Lead
Here’s where things get juicy for ultraportables or times you’re running on battery. The Radeon 890M integrated graphics inside the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 outperformed the Intel Arc-based integrated GPU in the Core Ultra 9 185H by 33–70% across different AAA tests. For instance:
- Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080p Low was almost 70% faster on AMD, hitting nearly 60 FPS vs Intel’s ~35 FPS. Huge difference in playability.
- Shadow of the Tomb Raider also favored AMD by around 33%. It got near 60 FPS vs Intel’s 40ish, which is still playable but not as smooth.
- God of War was nearly unplayable on the Intel iGPU, while AMD’s integrated graphics delivered a surprisingly smooth ride near or above 45–50 FPS with upscaling and low settings.
If integrated graphics matter because you want to run a smaller laptop without a discrete GPU, or you plan to game on battery power at less power draw, the AMD iGPU is the clear winner. This difference can’t be overlooked. Integrated Intel Arc is a step forward compared to older Intel iGPUs, but for now, AMD is still significantly ahead.
In Counter-Strike 2 with everything on low settings and a smaller resolution, Intel’s integrated Arc was somewhat respectable, sometimes hitting 80–90 FPS. AMD would creep up near 100, so it’s a narrower gap.
But for heavier games, AMD’s iGPU advantage becomes obvious. If you’ll be doing frequent GPU tasks without a dedicated card, AMD is the safer pick.
6. Overall Value, Price Points, and Conclusion
So, does any of this matter if one CPU is a lot more expensive than the other? Ultimately, absolutely. Price to performance is key.
Pricing Variations and Discounts
Right now, laptops with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 can be more expensive by around $200–$300 (USD) than similarly specced Intel Core Ultra 9 185H units. That means if gaming is your priority and the discrete GPU is your main focus, you could argue Intel is the better deal from a frames-per-dollar standpoint.
When big sales hit, Intel models sometimes get steeper discounts. Meanwhile, brand-new AMD models might hold their price for longer. That can shift the value proposition. If AMD’s performance advantage in rendering and battery life is worth 10–15% more cost, you might find it worthwhile.
If you rarely care about battery or CPU-heavy tasks like 3D modeling, you could get a better bargain with Intel. All these factors play into final price checks. Keep an eye out for discounts and daily deals.
Who Should Pick AMD?
- Content Creators who do a lot of Blender or video editing using CPU-based encodes or any application that natively takes advantage of AMD hardware acceleration in DaVinci Resolve or other tools.
- Anyone wanting better battery life, especially if your schedule is always on the go, with limited access to outlets.
- Integrated Graphics Gamers who only have an iGPU or want playable frame rates on battery. Radeon 890M is significantly stronger for AAA or mid-level titles.
- Laptop Enthusiasts who prefer cooler external temps or lower noise profiles at moderate TDP—AMD’s power scaling is hard to beat.
Who Should Pick Intel?
- Deal Seekers because Intel versions often go on sale and can undercut AMD by hundreds of dollars. If final cost is crucial and performance differences are modest, Intel is attractive.
- Users of Intel Quick Sync in certain video apps. Some workloads or specific features that heavily rely on Quick Sync can see big speed gains.
- Competitive Gamers who rely on external GPUs anyway and only want minor differences in CPU-limited eSports titles. The slight edge in certain single-core tasks may matter, or you simply choose whichever model has the better GPU or a bigger discount.
- High Single-Core Frequency fans, if your main workloads are single-thread bound, though differences here aren’t massive in these two chips.
Final Thoughts
Between the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H, AMD is the performance leader in multicore rendering and integrated GPU performance. It also edges Intel in battery life tests. If raw performance at medium to low power or integrated graphics usage is your bread and butter, go AMD.
Intel, however, has a strong case for those who want better discounts, strong single-core performance, or rely heavily on Quick Sync–accelerated software. For many tasks, either CPU might be overkill, so the best choice could be whichever meets your budget and usage profile. If I had to pick for everyday usage and frequent battery-based tasks, I’d lean AMD. If saving cash is your main goal, watch for Intel deals.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
1. Which laptop CPU offers the best battery life?
From my tests, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 tends to last longer on battery, often by 30–35% in video playback scenarios, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H trails slightly behind. If maximizing battery is key, AMD is often the better choice.
2. Is AMD or Intel better for overall gaming performance?
When paired with the same dedicated GPU, both CPUs produce nearly identical gaming frame rates in most AAA titles. However, if you rely on integrated graphics only, AMD’s Radeon 890M is significantly stronger for modern games.
3. Which processor should I choose for content creation and video editing?
If you’re rendering 3D scenes or exporting large video projects with CPU-only encodes, AMD leads in multicore performance. But if you heavily use Intel’s Quick Sync in specific applications, the Core Ultra 9 185H can be very fast for accelerated video encoding.
4. Does the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 run cooler than the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H?
Although AMD might show a higher core temperature in monitoring software, the Intel laptop often felt hotter on the exterior chassis. Both chips can run at 90–95°C when pushed, but AMD generally provides more efficient cooling at similar power limits.
5. What about AI tasks and hardware acceleration?
Both processors feature dedicated NPUs for AI-related workloads. Still, real-world benchmarks that fully exploit these accelerators are limited. If you need advanced AI hardware acceleration, compare specific app support; neither chip is a clear winner yet.
6. Which CPU is more budget-friendly?
Intel laptops can be found at lower prices or deeper discounts, making the Core Ultra 9 185H a better deal in some cases. However, if AMD’s chip isn’t substantially more expensive, it offers better efficiency and higher multicore gains, which can justify a slightly higher price.
7. Should I wait for the next generation of laptop CPUs?
If you want a system now and need strong battery life or integrated GPU performance, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 is an excellent pick. If you’re holding out for a possible big jump in performance, checking upcoming releases can help, but keep in mind that new launches may also come with higher prices initially.
Conclusion
I hope this detailed look at the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 185H helps you see exactly where each chip shines. There’s no “one size fits all,” but the gap in battery longevity, integrated GPU performance, and multicore workloads makes AMD an appealing choice if the price is right. Meanwhile, Intel’s advanced Quick Sync and frequent discounts remain powerful incentives.
Personally, I love seeing AMD push so hard with Zen 5 and Zen 5c. For top-tier battery life, cooler external temps, and consistently higher integrated GPU frame rates, they’re crushing it.
But if you find an incredible sale on Intel-based machines, you’ll still get fast single-core speeds, a strong media accelerator, and stable performance in many tasks. It’s all about picking what matters most in your workflow (and your wallet!).
Whichever way you go, both processors are future-ready with AI accelerators, advanced memory support, and plenty of horsepower. Just double-check your system’s specs, cooling design, and memory capacity to ensure you get the performance you deserve. Good luck choosing, and enjoy your new, blazing-fast laptop!