AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 across the eleven benchmark comparisons. The P164 takes seven wins, while the Ryzen 7 250 takes four. The margins vary considerably by workload type.

The largest single win for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 comes in data compression, where it scores 327,891 against 300,708 for the Ryzen 7 250, a delta of 8.3 percent. Single-thread performance is also strongly in favor of the P164, with 4,029 points versus 3,678, an 8.7 percent advantage. Extended instruction performance follows the same pattern, with the P164 at 24,193 and the Ryzen 7 250 at 21,613, a 10.7 percent gap. The P164 also leads in floating-point math, scoring 55,799 against 53,285, a 4.5 percent edge, and in multithread performance, 25,889 versus 25,089, a 3.1 percent margin. Physics testing shows the P164 ahead at 1,210 versus 1,147, a 5.2 percent lead.

The Ryzen 7 250's most decisive win is in data encryption, where it scores 17,661 against 16,055, a full 10 percent advantage. It also leads in integer math, 91,565 versus 87,940, a 4.1 percent margin. Random string sorting goes to the Ryzen 7 250 at 35,861 versus 34,801, a 3 percent edge. The find prime numbers test is the narrowest of the entire set, with the Ryzen 7 250 at 73 and the P164 at 71, a 2.8 percent difference.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The P164 posts an average of 52,901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Ryzen 7 250 averages 38,221, which lands in the 86th percentile. The P164's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F at 52,873, the Intel Xeon 634 at 52,974, the AMD EPYC 7313P at 53,206, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X at 53,288, all within 0.7 percent. The Ryzen 7 250 sits among the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at 38,194, the Intel Core i5-13600HX at 38,261, the Intel Core i5-14490F at 38,149, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H at 38,312, with deltas no larger than 0.2 percent.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same manufacturer, socket, process node, and foundry, but the underlying designs diverge significantly. The Ryzen 7 250 uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process with 25,000 million transistors on a die of 178 mm². The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c configuration under the Gorgon Point codename, also on a 4 nm TSMC process, but with a larger die at 233 mm². The transistor count for the P164 is not recorded in the database.

Cache layouts differ markedly. The Ryzen 7 250 provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The P164 increases L1 to 80 KB per core, keeps L2 at 1 MB per core, but reduces shared L3 to 8 MB. Both parts have 8 cores and 16 threads, so the cache difference is purely structural rather than core-count related.

Memory support is another point of divergence. The Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 only, while the P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both run dual-channel memory with an identical memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The P164 adds ECC memory support, which the Ryzen 7 250 does not offer.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Ryzen 7 250 carries the Radeon 780M, while the P164 carries the Radeon 880M. PCIe configuration is not identical either: the Ryzen 7 250 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the P164 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Clock speeds favor the Ryzen 7 250 on paper. It runs a 3.30 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.10 GHz. The P164 runs a 2.00 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.00 GHz. Both parts have a 28 W TDP, are unlocked for multiplier adjustment, and target the mobile market segment. The Ryzen 7 250 was released on January 5, 2025, while the P164 carries a release date of March 8, 2026.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 4,029 in PassMark single-thread testing, compared to 3,678 for the AMD Ryzen 7 250, an 8.7 percent advantage.

Q: Does the Ryzen 7 250 win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes. It wins data encryption by 10 percent, integer math by 4.1 percent, random string sorting by 3 percent, and find prime numbers by 2.8 percent.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The P164 averages 52,901, while the Ryzen 7 250 averages 38,221. The P164 sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, and the Ryzen 7 250 sits in the 86th percentile.

Q: Are both processors built on the same process node?

A: Yes, both use a 4 nm TSMC process, but the Ryzen 7 250 uses Zen 4 architecture in a 178 mm² die with 25,000 million transistors, while the P164 uses Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture in a 233 mm² die.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory, but the AMD Ryzen 7 250 does not. The P164 also adds LPDDR5X memory support, while the Ryzen 7 250 is DDR5 only.

Q: How do their cache configurations compare?

A: The Ryzen 7 250 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB 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 8 MB of shared L3.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several specifications: both have 8 cores, 16 threads, a 28 W TDP, the AMD Socket FP8, a dual-channel memory bus, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, a 4 nm TSMC process, and a mobile market segment designation.

The differences are as follows. Base clock is 3.30 GHz for the Ryzen 7 250 and 2.00 GHz for the P164. Boost clock is 5.10 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. The architecture is Zen 4 for the Ryzen 7 250, versus Zen 5 / Zen 5c for the P164. Codename is Hawk Point for the Ryzen 7 250, versus Gorgon Point for the P164. Die size is 178 mm² versus 233 mm². Transistor count is 25,000 million for the Ryzen 7 250, with no recorded value for the P164. L1 cache is 64 KB per core versus 80 KB per core. L3 cache is 16 MB shared versus 8 MB. Memory support is DDR5 versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X. ECC memory is not supported on the Ryzen 7 250, but is supported on the P164. PCIe is Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the Ryzen 7 250, versus Gen 4 with 16 lanes on the P164. Integrated graphics is Radeon 780M versus Radeon 880M. Release date is January 5, 2025, versus March 8, 2026. The part number is 100-000001722 for the Ryzen 7 250, with no recorded part number for the P164.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the faster processor overall. Its average benchmark score of 52,901 sits well above the Ryzen 7 250's 38,221, and its 91st percentile ranking exceeds the 86th percentile of the Ryzen 7 250. The P164 wins seven of the eleven head-to-head comparisons, including the largest margins in the dataset. Its 8.7 percent single-thread lead and 8.3 percent data compression lead are the most substantial differences recorded.

The Ryzen 7 250 does retain advantages in specific workloads. Its 10 percent data encryption win is the largest margin in either direction, and it also leads in integer math, random string sorting, and find prime numbers. These are meaningful for tasks that rely on those specific operations, but they do not overcome the P164's broader lead across the rest of the test suite.

For users prioritizing raw throughput, the P164 is the stronger choice. For workloads that depend on encryption and integer operations, the Ryzen 7 250 has a measurable edge.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the pick for single-thread performance, data compression, extended instruction workloads, floating-point math, multithread performance, and physics calculations. Its single-thread score of 4,029 and multithread score of 25,889 are both above the corresponding Ryzen 7 250 figures. The data compression result of 327,891 shows a substantial lead in that area.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the pick for data encryption, integer math, random string sorting, and prime number finding. The encryption score of 17,661 is 10 percent above the P164, making it the strongest relative result for the Ryzen 7 250. The integer math score of 91,565 also clears the P164 by a solid margin.

The overall pattern is that the P164 wins the broader, more general-purpose workloads, while the Ryzen 7 250 wins a narrower set of specific computational tasks. The percentile data reinforces this: the P164 ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen 7 250 ranks in the 86th.