AMD Ryzen 5 230 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 records an average benchmark score of 52901, while the AMD Ryzen 5 230 scores 25782. The P164 sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 78th percentile for the Ryzen 5 230.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-threaded performance?

A: In the PassMark single-thread test, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 4029, which is 11.7% higher than the Ryzen 5 230's 3558. The P164 also has a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins the PassMark multithread test with 25889 points, a 25% advantage over the Ryzen 5 230's 19411. The P164 also has more cores and threads (8 cores/16 threads versus 6 cores/12 threads).

Q: What are the cache configurations for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen 5 230 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 1 MB of L2 cache per core.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 230 supports DDR5 memory only, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus and have the same memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has ECC memory support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 5 230 does not. This makes the P164 more suited to embedded or reliability-focused environments.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear performance hierarchy: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database. Its average benchmark score of 52901 places it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and the AMD EPYC 7313P, both with scores within 0.7% of the P164. The Ryzen 5 230, by contrast, averages 25782 and sits in the 78th percentile, with rivals like the Intel Core i7-11700K and AMD Ryzen 7 7730U within 0.6% of its score.

For users who need maximum throughput, the P164 is the data-backed choice. Its 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with a 5.00 GHz boost clock and Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture, give it advantages in every measured workload. The Ryzen 5 230 is not without merit: it uses a smaller die (178 mm² versus 233 mm²), has more L3 cache (16 MB versus 8 MB), and carries a higher base clock (3.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz). But in the benchmark results, none of those traits translate into a single win.

The P164 also offers ECC memory support and both DDR5 and LPDDR5X compatibility, which broadens its applicability for embedded systems. The Ryzen 5 230 is a capable mobile processor, but the data shows it is outclassed by the P164 across the board. Buyers prioritizing raw performance should select the P164; those constrained to a smaller die or needing more L3 cache might still consider the Ryzen 5 230, but the benchmark delta is substantial.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 dominates the head-to-head results, winning all 11 recorded comparisons. The largest margin is in PassMark extended instructions, where the P164 scores 24193 versus 15618 for the Ryzen 5 230, a 35.4% advantage. This suggests a significant gap in workloads that use advanced instruction sets, likely reflecting the newer Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture.

Data compression shows the P164 at 327891 against 218588 for the Ryzen 5 230, a 33.3% difference. Floating-point math follows closely: the P164 scores 55799, which is 30.1% higher than the Ryzen 5 230's 38993. Integer math also favors the P164, with 87940 versus 67257, a 23.5% edge.

The smallest margin is in the find prime numbers test, where the P164 scores 71 and the Ryzen 5 230 scores 66, a 7% difference. This indicates that the two processors are relatively close in this specific workload, despite the P164's overall dominance. The single-thread test shows an 11.7% gap (4029 versus 3558), while the multithread test shows a 25% gap (25889 versus 19411).

The physics test also favors the P164, with 1210 points versus 958, a 20.8% margin. Random string sorting shows a 25.2% difference (34801 versus 26019), and data encryption shows a 17.3% gap (16055 versus 13280). In every case, the P164 records the higher score, with no benchmark result favoring the Ryzen 5 230.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen 5 230 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: the Ryzen 5 230 runs at 3.50 GHz, while the P164 runs at 2.00 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, with the P164 at 5.00 GHz and the Ryzen 5 230 at 4.90 GHz.

Both processors have a TDP of 28 and use the AMD Socket FP8. The Ryzen 5 230 uses a Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, while the P164 uses the Gorgon Point codename with a Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture. The process node is the same for both: 4 nm at TSMC.

Transistor counts differ, with the Ryzen 5 230 at 25,000 million transistors and the P164 having no recorded transistor count. Die size also differs: the Ryzen 5 230 measures 178 mm², while the P164 measures 233 mm². Cache configurations vary, with the Ryzen 5 230 offering 64 KB of L1 per core and 16 MB of shared L3, while the P164 offers 80 KB of L1 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. Both have 1 MB of L2 per core.

Memory support differs: the Ryzen 5 230 supports DDR5 only, while the P164 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory support is present only on the P164. PCIe lanes differ, with the Ryzen 5 230 offering Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only) and the P164 offering Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the Ryzen 5 230 uses Radeon 760M, while the P164 uses Radeon 880M.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is significant. The AMD Ryzen 5 230 is built on Zen 4 with the Hawk Point codename, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses Zen 5 / Zen 5c with the Gorgon Point codename. This generational difference likely explains the P164's benchmark superiority, particularly in extended instructions and floating-point math.

The P164 uses a hybrid core arrangement implied by the Zen 5 / Zen 5c designation, with 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ryzen 5 230 uses a homogeneous Zen 4 design with 6 cores and 12 threads. The P164's larger die (233 mm² versus 178 mm²) accommodates the additional cores and newer architecture, although no transistor count is recorded for the P164.

Cache architecture differs notably. The Ryzen 5 230 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 16 MB of shared L3, while the P164 has 80 KB of L1 per core and only 8 MB of shared L3. The smaller L3 on the P164 is offset by its higher core count and newer architecture, and the benchmark data suggests this trade-off favors the P164 in practice.

Both processors use the same 4 nm TSMC process and share a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The P164 adds LPDDR5X support and ECC memory, features absent from the Ryzen 5 230. PCIe connectivity favors the Ryzen 5 230 in lane count (20 versus 16), but both use Gen 4. The integrated GPU also differs, with the P164 using Radeon 880M versus the Ryzen 5 230's Radeon 760M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its largest advantages come in extended instructions (35.4%), data compression (33.3%), and floating-point math (30.1%). These results indicate the P164 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads, including data processing, scientific calculations, and applications that leverage modern instruction sets.

The P164 also leads in integer math by 23.5%, multithread performance by 25%, and random string sorting by 25.2%. Its physics score is 20.8% higher, and its data encryption score is 17.3% higher. Even in the closest test, find prime numbers, the P164 holds a 7% edge. Single-thread performance favors the P164 by 11.7%, showing that its higher boost clock and newer architecture deliver benefits even in lightly threaded tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 5 230 does not win any recorded benchmark, but it does have attributes that could matter in specific contexts. Its smaller die size (178 mm² versus 233 mm²) suggests lower manufacturing footprint, and its larger shared L3 cache (16 MB versus 8 MB) could benefit workloads with high cache reuse. Its higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz may also provide better responsiveness at lower power states, though the identical 28 TDP limits the practical impact.

The P164's ECC memory support and LPDDR5X compatibility make it the more versatile option for embedded deployments where reliability and memory flexibility are priorities. The Ryzen 5 230, with its Hawk Point architecture and Radeon 760M graphics, remains a competent mobile processor, but the recorded data offers no benchmark scenario where it outperforms the P164. For any workload represented in the database, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the measured winner.