AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 are both 6-core, 12-thread mobile processors sharing the same AMD Socket FP8, yet the benchmark data reveals two distinct performance profiles. The Ryzen 5 240, a Zen 4 Hawk Point part, is positioned for raw throughput in multi-threaded applications, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P132, a Zen 5 / Zen 5c Gorgon Point part, focuses on efficiency and a slight edge in single-threaded execution. The recorded data shows a clear split: the Ryzen 5 240 wins 9 of the 11 head-to-head comparisons, while the P132 takes the remaining 2, which are the single-thread tests.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is defined by the benchmark results. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is the clear victor in heavy, parallel workloads. Its wins span data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multithreaded tasks, physics simulation, and random string sorting. The largest margin is in data encryption, where it leads by 38.5 percent. This suggests the Ryzen 5 240 is better suited for tasks that saturate all available cores, such as video rendering, code compilation, or scientific computing, where the higher clock speeds and larger L3 cache provide a substantial advantage.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 wins in single-threaded performance, albeit by a narrow margin. Its scores in the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread tests are 3713 versus 3675 for the Ryzen 5 240, a delta of just 1 percent. The architecture difference, Zen 5 / Zen 5c versus Zen 4, likely contributes to this edge. This makes the P132 preferable for lightly-threaded workloads like legacy applications, certain database queries, or front-end tasks where a single core's efficiency is paramount. Its lower TDP of 28 watts, compared to 45 watts for the Ryzen 5 240, also positions it for fanless or low-power embedded designs where sustained throughput is less critical than energy consumption.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their design generations. The Ryzen 5 240 uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Ryzen AI Embedded P132 uses the Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture with the Gorgon Point codename, also on a 4 nm TSMC node, but its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. This generational leap is visible in the cache hierarchy. The Ryzen 5 240 has a 64 KB L1 cache per core and a 16 MB shared L3 cache. The P132 has an 80 KB L1 cache per core, which is larger, but its shared L3 cache is only 4 MB, a significant reduction. Both processors share a 1 MB L2 cache per core.

Clock speeds also diverge sharply. The Ryzen 5 240 has a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The P132 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Ryzen 5 240's higher base clock is a major factor in its multi-threaded dominance, as it maintains high frequency across all cores under load. The P132's lower base clock, combined with its 28-watt TDP, indicates a design that prioritizes thermal efficiency over sustained peak performance. The P132 also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Ryzen 5 240, and its memory support extends to LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the Ryzen 5 240 lists only DDR5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results provide exact margins for each comparison. In passmark_data_compression, the Ryzen 5 240 scores 267,963 against 230,437 for the P132, a 16.3 percent lead. Data encryption shows a wider gap: 15,849 versus 11,444, a 38.5 percent advantage for the Ryzen 5 240. Extended instructions follow at 20,201 versus 16,520, a 22.3 percent lead. Prime number finding yields 70 versus 57, a 22.8 percent difference. Floating-point math is closer, with 45,301 versus 42,248, a 7.2 percent lead. Integer math shows 73,189 versus 62,249, a 17.6 percent advantage. Multithreaded performance mirrors that margin exactly: 22,658 versus 19,262, also a 17.6 percent lead. Physics simulation is the tightest multi-thread result, with 1,060 versus 1,022, a 3.7 percent win for the Ryzen 5 240. Random string sorting shows a 28.6 percent lead, with scores of 32,385 versus 25,181.

The two single-thread tests are the only wins for the P132. Both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread record identical scores of 3,713 for the P132 and 3,675 for the Ryzen 5 240, a 1 percent delta in favor of the P132. These results indicate that while the Ryzen 5 240 dominates in aggregate throughput, the P132's newer Zen 5 core has a slight instruction-per-clock advantage that matters in single-threaded scenarios. The overall average benchmark scores reflect this: the Ryzen 5 240 has an average of 33,542, while the P132 has a higher average of 37,804. This discrepancy arises because the P132's dataset includes fewer multi-thread tests, which skews its average upward, though its percentile ranking of 86 versus 84 for the Ryzen 5 240 confirms its stronger overall position in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

A: The Ryzen 5 240 has a 16 MB shared L3 cache, whereas the Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has a 4 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: Does the Ryzen AI Embedded P132 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the P132 supports ECC memory, a feature not listed for the Ryzen 5 240.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 wins both single-thread tests, scoring 3,713 compared to 3,675 for the Ryzen 5 240, a 1 percent difference.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmarks does each processor win?

A: The Ryzen 5 240 wins 9 of the 11 comparisons, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P132 wins 2.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Ryzen 5 240 has a TDP of 45 watts, and the Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has a TDP of 28 watts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Ryzen 5 240 has a base clock of 4.30 GHz versus 2.00 GHz for the P132, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. The TDP is 45 watts for the Ryzen 5 240 and 28 watts for the P132. The architecture is Zen 4 for the Ryzen 5 240, while the P132 uses Zen 5 / Zen 5c. The codename is Hawk Point for the former and Gorgon Point for the latter. The L1 cache is 64 KB per core for the Ryzen 5 240 and 80 KB per core for the P132. The L3 cache is 16 MB shared for the Ryzen 5 240 and 4 MB for the P132. Memory support lists only DDR5 for the Ryzen 5 240, but DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the P132. ECC memory is false for the Ryzen 5 240 and true for the P132. PCIe lanes differ: 20 lanes for the Ryzen 5 240 and 14 lanes for the P132, both Gen 4. The integrated graphics are the Radeon 760M for the Ryzen 5 240 and the Radeon 840M for the P132. The transistor count and die size are recorded for the Ryzen 5 240 at 25,000 million and 178 mm², but are not available for the P132. The release dates are also distinct, with the Ryzen 5 240 listed as January 2025 and the P132 as March 2026.