AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data produces a completely one-sided comparison. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins all 11 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 records zero wins. That outcome is not subtle: across every PassMark workload category, from integer math to single-thread execution, the P185 posts a higher score.

The P185's largest advantages appear in computationally dense workloads. In the prime number search test, the P185 scores 129 against the Ryzen 5 240's 70, a 45.7% gap. Physics simulation shows a 40.2% difference, with the P185 at 1772 versus 1060. Integer math follows closely: 117832 for the P185 versus 73189 for the Ryzen 5 240, a 37.9% delta. Floating point math shows 70587 against 45301, a 35.8% gap. These are substantial margins in workloads that scale with core count and instruction throughput.

The P185's smallest win is in single-thread performance. It scores 3977 against 3675, a 7.6% advantage. That is still a clear win, but it indicates the two processors are much closer when only one core is active. Multi-threaded workloads, by contrast, show the P185 28.8% ahead in the PassMark multithread test, 31817 versus 22658. Data compression shows a 28.4% gap, 374429 versus 267963. Extended instructions show 26544 versus 20201, a 23.9% difference. Random string sorting shows 40557 versus 32385, a 20.1% gap. Data encryption shows 19612 versus 15849, a 19.2% difference.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward. The Ryzen 5 240 holds its own in lightly threaded tasks, where its high base clock and boost clock keep it within striking distance. The P185 dominates in every heavily parallel workload, producing margins of roughly 20% to 46%. For workloads that stress many cores simultaneously, the P185 is the stronger part. For single-thread responsiveness, the Ryzen 5 240 is competitive but still behind.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations. The Ryzen 5 240 uses Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c configuration under the Gorgon Point codename. Both are built on TSMC's 4 nm process, so the manufacturing node does not explain the performance difference.

Core counts differ substantially. The Ryzen 5 240 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The P185 has 12 cores and 24 threads, exactly double. Cache layouts also differ. The Ryzen 5 240 provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The P185 provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3. The P185's larger L1 per core reflects the Zen 5 design's wider instruction fetch and decode resources.

Die size differs as well. The Ryzen 5 240 has a 178 mm² die, while the P185 is larger at 233 mm². The transistor count for the Ryzen 5 240 is listed at 25,000 million, while the P185's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Clock behavior is a notable contrast. The Ryzen 5 240 has a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The P185 has a much lower base clock of 2.00 GHz but a slightly higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The P185 also carries a lower TDP of 28 watts against the Ryzen 5 240's 45 watts. That combination, 12 cores, a 2.00 GHz base, and a 28-watt TDP, suggests the P185 relies on aggressive boost behavior and its Zen 5c efficiency cores to deliver throughput within a constrained power envelope.

Memory support differs. The Ryzen 5 240 supports DDR5 only, while the P185 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, and both record 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. The P185 supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 5 240 does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Ryzen 5 240 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the P185 offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ryzen 5 240 uses the Radeon 760M, while the P185 uses the Radeon 890M. Both are mobile-segment parts, and both use the AMD Socket FP8. The release dates are separated by more than a year: the Ryzen 5 240 was released on 2025-01-05, while the P185 is dated 2026-02-28. Both are listed as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins the majority of benchmark tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins all 11 recorded head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 records no wins in the database.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The P185 scores 3977 in PassMark single-thread against 3675 for the Ryzen 5 240, a 7.6% advantage. This is the smallest margin between the two processors.

Q: How large is the multi-thread performance gap?

A: The P185 scores 31817 in PassMark multithread against 22658 for the Ryzen 5 240, a 28.8% advantage. The largest gap is in prime number search, where the P185 leads by 45.7%.

Q: Do the two CPUs use the same architecture?

A: No. The Ryzen 5 240 uses Zen 4 under the Hawk Point codename. The P185 uses a Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid configuration under the Gorgon Point codename.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The Ryzen 5 240 supports DDR5 only. The P185 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The P185 also supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 5 240 does not.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Ryzen 5 240 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The P185 has 12 cores and 24 threads, exactly double the core and thread count.

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The P185 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, slightly above the Ryzen 5 240's 5.00 GHz. The Ryzen 5 240 has a much higher base clock of 4.30 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 240 | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 4.30 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 28 W |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 / Zen 5c |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Gorgon Point |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 233 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 16 MB |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 4, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 760M | Radeon 890M |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-02-28 |

Both processors share the AMD Socket FP8, TSMC 4 nm process, dual-channel memory bus, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and a locked multiplier. Both are mobile-segment parts with Active production status. The Ryzen 5 240 has a transistor count of 25,000 million, while the P185's transistor count is not recorded. The Ryzen 5 240 has a part number of 100-000001727, while the P185's part number is listed as unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head table in the database lists 11 tests, all PassMark workloads. The P185 wins every one, but the margins vary widely and tell a clear story about where the architecture difference matters most.

The largest win for the P185 is in the prime number search test. The P185 scores 129, the Ryzen 5 240 scores 70, and the delta is 45.7%. This test is highly sensitive to integer throughput and core count, and the P185's 12 cores against 6 explains most of the gap.

Physics simulation shows the second-largest margin. The P185 scores 1772 against 1060, a 40.2% difference. Physics workloads typically scale with thread count and memory latency, and the P185's doubled thread count provides a strong advantage.

Integer math shows a 37.9% gap. The P185 scores 117832, the Ryzen 5 240 scores 73189. Floating point math shows a 35.8% gap, with scores of 70587 and 45301. Both of these are classic multi-thread scaling tests, and the P185's core advantage shows directly.

The multithread aggregate test shows a 28.8% gap. The P185 scores 31817, the Ryzen 5 240 scores 22658. Data compression shows a 28.4% gap, 374429 versus 267963. Extended instructions show a 23.9% gap, 26544 versus 20201. Random string sorting shows a 20.1% gap, 40557 versus 32385. Data encryption shows a 19.2% gap, 19612 versus 15849.

The smallest margin is in single-thread performance. The P185 scores 3977 against 3675, a 7.6% advantage. This is the only test where the Ryzen 5 240's high base clock of 4.30 GHz appears to matter. In single-thread workloads, the Ryzen 5 240 stays within striking distance, but it still loses.

The database also records the P185's average benchmark score at 62839, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX with an average score of 62738 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-13790F at 63080 with a delta of -0.4%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX at 63173 with a delta of -0.5%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 at 62498 with a delta of 0.5%. The Ryzen 5 240, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 33542, placing it in the 84th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H at 33537 with a delta of 0%, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at 33667 with a delta of -0.4%, the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX at 33668 with a delta of -0.4%, and the Intel Core i5-12600HX at 33375 with a delta of 0.5%.

The percentile difference reinforces the head-to-head results. The P185 sits 9 percentile points higher than the Ryzen 5 240, and its average score is roughly 87% higher. The P185 also has a lower TDP of 28 watts despite having twice the cores, which indicates the Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid design is substantially more efficient per watt under the recorded conditions. The Ryzen 5 240's higher base clock gives it a meaningful advantage in single-thread responsiveness, but the recorded data shows the P185 still outpaces it there, and dominates everywhere else.