AMD Athlon PRO 300U vs AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B Comparison

Opening paragraph: Not all benchmark comparisons are decided by core count alone. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B and AMD Athlon PRO 300U are both 15-watt Zen-based parts on the same FP5 socket, but their benchmark results tell a more complex story than their specifications suggest. Across the head-to-head data, the Ryzen Embedded V1605B takes two of three wins, yet the Athlon PRO 300U delivers a surprising upset in one of the most modern workloads. Below, the numbers separate the two.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in the comparison is the Cinebench R15 multi-core run. Here, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B scores 654, while the AMD Athlon PRO 300U manages only 349. That is a delta of 87.4 percent in favor of the Ryzen part — a massive margin that nearly doubles the Athlon’s output. The reason is straightforward: the Ryzen V1605B brings four cores and eight threads to the table, while the Athlon PRO 300U is a two-core, four-thread design. In a heavily threaded legacy benchmark like R15, the extra physical cores dominate.

The single-core picture is equally lopsided, though in the same direction. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen Embedded V1605B posts 841 against the Athlon PRO 300U’s 489. That is a 72 percent advantage for the Ryzen part. Notably, the Ryzen’s boost clock is 3.60 GHz compared to the Athlon’s 3.30 GHz, so the higher frequency helps explain the gap. Even accounting for the Athlon’s higher base clock of 2.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, the Ryzen’s boost ceiling and architecture tuning win out in this test.

However, the story flips dramatically in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Here, the AMD Athlon PRO 300U scores 3468, beating the Ryzen Embedded V1605B’s 3160 by 8.9 percent. This is the single biggest surprise in the data. Despite having half the cores and threads, the Athlon PRO 300U outperforms the Ryzen part in a modern multi-threaded benchmark. The likely explanation lies in cache allocation: the Athlon PRO 300U carries 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ryzen V1605B has only 2 MB of shared L3. In R23’s workload, that extra cache seems to compensate for the core deficit.

It is worth remembering the two chips land nearly identically in overall average benchmark score. The Ryzen Embedded V1605B averages 1196, and the Athlon PRO 300U averages 1193 — a difference of just 0.2 percent. In the nearest-rival rankings, the Ryzen sits 0.2 percent above the Athlon, which itself is exactly level with the Intel Core i3-4170 and Intel Core i7-8665UE. These two AMD chips are effectively tied in aggregate performance, despite their very different core configurations.

The Ryzen V1605B wins two of the three head-to-head tests, but the Athlon PRO 300U wins the most recent benchmark generation. That split result means neither chip is a clean sweep.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice depends heavily on workload. If the priority is raw multi-threaded throughput in older applications, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B is the clear pick. Its 87.4 percent lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core is enormous, and its 72 percent advantage in R23 single-core shows it is no slouch in lightly threaded tasks either. For users running legacy software that scales with cores, the V1605B’s 4-core/8-thread layout is decisive.

But for modern multi-threaded workloads, the AMD Athlon PRO 300U deserves serious consideration. Its 8.9 percent victory in Cinebench R23 multi-core is not a fluke — the benchmark is recent and heavily used. The Athlon’s doubled L3 cache (4 MB versus 2 MB) appears to give it a real edge in this specific test. If the software in question is built around newer rendering or productivity engines, the Athlon PRO 300U may actually deliver better performance despite fewer cores.

The average benchmark scores suggest these are near-peer processors overall. With a 0.2 percent difference in average score, neither chip offers a meaningful aggregate advantage. The Ryzen V1605B is the safer bet for mixed workloads that include older multi-threaded code and any single-threaded responsiveness. The Athlon PRO 300U is the specialist — it wins where cache matters more than core count.

Market segment also tips the balance. The Ryzen V1605B is classified as Desktop, while the Athlon PRO 300U is Mobile. For embedded or desktop builds, the Ryzen part’s desktop classification aligns better with its intended use. The Athlon’s mobile classification suggests it was designed for power-sensitive laptops, where its lower core count and higher base clock (2.40 GHz) might be preferable for battery life. Users building a compact desktop should favor the Ryzen; those optimizing for a thin-and-light laptop should look at the Athlon.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen architecture using a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. They share the same core design lineage, but the codenames differ: the Ryzen Embedded V1605B uses the “Great Horned Owl” variant, while the Athlon PRO 300U uses “Raven Ridge 2.” Both are functionally Zen, so instruction-level behavior is largely identical.

The most significant architectural divergence is in the L3 cache. The Ryzen Embedded V1605B provides 2 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Athlon PRO 300U doubles that to 4 MB of shared L3. This is the single biggest architectural difference that explains the R23 multi-core result. The L1 and L2 caches are identical on both parts: 128 KB per core and 512 KB per core, respectively.

The core counts differ fundamentally. The Ryzen V1605B has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Athlon PRO 300U has 2 cores and 4 threads. This is a direct consequence of silicon binning and product segmentation — the Ryzen part is a full quad-core implementation, while the Athlon is a dual-core implementation. Thread counts scale accordingly.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Ryzen Embedded V1605B pairs its CPU with Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the Athlon PRO 300U uses the smaller Radeon Vega 3. This is a major architectural distinction for any workload that touches the iGPU, though no graphics benchmarks are available in the data.

The transistor count and die size are listed only for the Ryzen V1605B (4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die); the Athlon PRO 300U does not have those figures in the pack. Both parts use the same socket (AMD Socket FP5) and support DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus, but neither has ECC memory support.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows clear divergence in core and thread counts. The Ryzen Embedded V1605B has 4 cores and 8 threads, versus 2 cores and 4 threads for the Athlon PRO 300U. Base clocks differ: the Ryzen runs at 2000.00 MHz, the Athlon at 2400.00 MHz. Boost clocks favor the Ryzen at 3.60 GHz against the Athlon’s 3.30 GHz.

Cache configurations differ as noted: L1 and L2 are identical per core, but L3 is 2 MB shared on the Ryzen versus 4 MB shared on the Athlon. Both are rated at 15 W TDP, which is a point of parity. The integrated graphics differ: Radeon Vega 8 on the Ryzen, Radeon Vega 3 on the Athlon.

Market segment is another distinguishing field: the Ryzen V1605B is classified as Desktop, the Athlon PRO 300U as Mobile. Release dates differ by over a year — the Ryzen launched on 2018-02-20, the Athlon on 2019-04-07. Neither chip has a launch MSRP in the data, and both have production status marked as Active. Neither is multiplier-unlocked. The Ryzen series is listed as “1000 series,” while the Athlon has no series designation.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD Athlon PRO 300U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Why does the Athlon PRO 300U win Cinebench R23 multi-core despite having fewer cores?

A: The Athlon PRO 300U carries 4 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 2 MB on the Ryzen V1605B. In the R23 multi-core test, the Athlon scores 3468 against the Ryzen’s 3160, an 8.9 percent advantage that the extra cache likely drives.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Ryzen V1605B scores 654 versus the Athlon PRO 300U’s 349 — a delta of 87.4 percent in favor of the Ryzen.

Q: Are these CPUs similar in overall average performance?

A: Yes. The Ryzen V1605B averages 1196 across benchmarks, and the Athlon PRO 300U averages 1193, a difference of just 0.2 percent. The Ryzen’s nearest rival is the Athlon PRO 300U at that same 0.2 percent delta.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory type?

A: Both support DDR4 memory with a dual-channel memory bus, and neither supports ECC memory.

Q: Which CPU is better for single-core performance?

A: The Ryzen V1605B is clearly better. It scores 841 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus the Athlon PRO 300U’s 489, a 72 percent advantage. Its higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz versus 3.30 GHz contributes to this result.