AMD Ryzen 5 150 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the clear performance leader in every recorded benchmark comparison against the AMD Ryzen 5 150. The data shows a decisive sweep, with the P164 winning all 11 head-to-head tests. This outcome is driven by a newer architecture, more cores, and a higher boost clock, but the Ryzen 5 150 retains advantages in base clock, power draw, and PCIe lane count. The following analysis breaks down where each processor excels, the architectural differences, and the measured performance gaps.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 dominates every single benchmark in the database. The largest margin comes in extended instructions, where the P164 scores 24,193 versus the Ryzen 5 150's 14,675, a 39.3% advantage. Data compression shows a 35.6% lead (327,891 versus 211,289), and random string sorting a 35.7% lead (34,801 versus 22,382). In floating point math, the P164 delivers 55,799 against 35,118, a 37.1% gap. Integer math sees the P164 at 87,940 versus 62,151, a 29.3% difference, the smallest margin among the major workload categories. Multi-thread performance favors the P164 at 25,889 versus 17,492, a 32.4% lead, while single-thread performance shows a 21.7% advantage (4,029 versus 3,155).

The Ryzen 5 150 has no benchmark wins. Its only areas of relative strength, based on recorded data, are its higher base clock of 3.30 GHz versus 2.00 GHz on the P164, its lower 35 W TDP compared to 28 W for the P164, and its larger L3 cache of 16 MB shared versus 8 MB on the P164. Additionally, the Ryzen 5 150 provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) versus 16 on the P164. These are specification advantages, not performance wins in the measured tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Ryzen 5 150 uses Zen 3+ with the Rembrandt-R codename, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. The Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses the Gorgon Point codename with a Zen 5 / Zen 5c generation, built on TSMC's 4 nm process. The P164's die size is 233 mm² compared to 210 mm² for the Ryzen 5 150. The P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ryzen 5 150 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Ryzen 5 150 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The P164 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and only 8 MB of L3. This means the P164 offers larger per-core caches but half the total L3.

Memory support also sets them apart. The Ryzen 5 150 supports DDR5 only with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a higher bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The P164 also supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 5 150 does not.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ryzen 5 150 uses a Radeon 660M, while the P164 uses a Radeon 880M. The sockets are different: the Ryzen 5 150 uses AMD Socket FP7, and the P164 uses AMD Socket FP8. The production status for both is Active, but the release dates differ, with the Ryzen 5 150 dated September 30, 2025, and the P164 dated March 8, 2026. Neither processor has a launch MSRP recorded, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 4,029 in the PassMark single-thread test, which is 21.7% higher than the Ryzen 5 150's 3,155.

Q: How much faster is the P164 in multi-thread workloads?

A: The P164 records 25,889 in the PassMark multithread test versus 17,492 for the Ryzen 5 150, a 32.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 150 have any advantage in cache size?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 5 150 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while the P164 has 8 MB. However, the P164 has larger L1 and L2 caches per core: 80 KB and 1 MB per core respectively, versus 64 KB and 512 KB per core for the Ryzen 5 150.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 5 150 does not.

Q: What are the power ratings of these two processors?

A: The Ryzen 5 150 has a TDP of 35 W, while the P164 has a lower TDP of 28 W despite delivering higher performance in every benchmark.

Q: Which processor provides more PCIe lanes?

A: The Ryzen 5 150 provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), while the P164 provides 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only).

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two processors. The Ryzen 5 150 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The base clock of the Ryzen 5 150 is 3.30 GHz, higher than the P164's 2.00 GHz. The boost clock is higher on the P164 at 5.00 GHz versus 4.55 GHz on the Ryzen 5 150. The TDP is 35 W for the Ryzen 5 150 and 28 W for the P164.

The process node is 6 nm for the Ryzen 5 150 and 4 nm for the P164, both from TSMC. The die size is 210 mm² for the Ryzen 5 150 and 233 mm² for the P164. The architecture is Zen 3+ (Rembrandt-R) for the Ryzen 5 150, while the P164 is based on Gorgon Point with a Zen 5 / Zen 5c generation.

Cache layouts differ as described: the Ryzen 5 150 has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3; the P164 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB L3. Memory support is DDR5 only for the Ryzen 5 150, while the P164 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Ryzen 5 150 and 89.6 GB/s for the P164. ECC memory is unsupported on the Ryzen 5 150 and supported on the P164.

PCIe connectivity gives the Ryzen 5 150 20 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) versus 16 for the P164. The integrated graphics are Radeon 660M for the Ryzen 5 150 and Radeon 880M for the P164. The sockets are FP7 for the Ryzen 5 150 and FP8 for the P164. The release dates are September 30, 2025 for the Ryzen 5 150 and March 8, 2026 for the P164.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniformly in favor of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164. The smallest margin is in data encryption, where the P164 scores 16,055 versus 13,425 for the Ryzen 5 150, a 16.4% difference. The largest margin is in extended instructions at 39.3%, with scores of 24,193 and 14,675.

Data compression shows the P164 at 327,891 versus 211,289, a 35.6% lead. Floating point math is 55,799 against 35,118, a 37.1% gap. Integer math is 87,940 versus 62,151, a 29.3% difference. The find prime numbers test gives the P164 a 71 score against 47, a 33.8% lead. Physics results show 1,210 versus 806, a 33.4% gap. Random string sorting is 34,801 versus 22,382, a 35.7% lead. Multi-thread performance is 25,889 versus 17,492, a 32.4% advantage. Single-thread performance is 4,029 versus 3,155, a 21.7% lead.

These deltas are consistent across workload types, indicating that the P164's architectural and core-count advantages translate into broad performance gains rather than specialization in one area. The average benchmark score confirms this: the P164 sits at 52,901 with a 91st percentile rank among all CPUs, while the Ryzen 5 150 sits at 34,881 with an 84th percentile rank. The nearest rivals also reflect the performance tier difference. The Ryzen 5 150's closest competitor is the Intel Xeon 6349P with an average score of 34,890 and a 0% delta, followed by the Intel Core 7 253PTE at 34,962 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i7-13800H at 34,988 (0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i9-12900HX at 35,003 (0.3% behind). The P164's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F at 52,873 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Xeon 634 at 52,974 (0.1% behind), the AMD EPYC 7313P at 53,206 (0.6% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X at 53,288 (0.7% behind).

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 150 in every measured test. The P164 delivers a 32.4% higher multi-thread score, a 21.7% higher single-thread score, and leads by margins ranging from 16.4% in encryption to 39.3% in extended instructions. Its 91st percentile rank versus an 84th percentile rank places it in a higher performance class, with an average score of 52,901 compared to 34,881.

The Ryzen 5 150 does offer some specification-level advantages. Its 3.30 GHz base clock is considerably higher than the P164's 2.00 GHz, which could matter for workloads that rely on sustained base frequencies rather than boost behavior. Its 16 MB of shared L3 is double the P164's 8 MB, and its 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes exceed the P164's 16. The Ryzen 5 150 also fits a different socket (FP7 versus FP8), which may be relevant for platform compatibility.

The P164 counters with a higher boost clock (5.00 GHz versus 4.55 GHz), a more advanced 4 nm process versus 6 nm, a larger die (233 mm² versus 210 mm²), more cores and threads (8/16 versus 6/12), larger L1 and L2 caches per core, higher memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s), ECC support, and a more capable integrated GPU (Radeon 880M versus Radeon 660M). It also does all of this at a lower TDP of 28 W versus 35 W.

For users prioritizing raw computational throughput, the choice is the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164. For applications where the higher base clock, larger L3, or additional PCIe lanes of the Ryzen 5 150 are more important than the P164's benchmark dominance, the Ryzen 5 150 remains a viable option. But based purely on the recorded performance data, the P164 is the superior processor in every test category.