AMD Ryzen 7 260 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 260 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 serve distinctly different roles within the mobile processor space, and the recorded data reflects that split. The Ryzen 7 260 has a complete benchmark profile, with scores across Cinebench R15, Cinebench R23, and Passmark suites. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, which limits direct numerical comparison. However, the architectural data provides a clear picture of where each processor is designed to excel.

The Ryzen 7 260 wins in raw single-thread and multi-thread performance scenarios based on its clock speeds and benchmark results. Its boost clock of 5.10 GHz, paired with a base clock of 3.80 GHz, places it in a performance tier typical of high-end mobile processors. The benchmark data confirms this: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 17211.5, and single-core scores 1770.5. Passmark single-thread scores 3736, while multithread scores 28078. These numbers indicate a processor that handles demanding workloads, such as rendering, compilation, and heavy productivity tasks, with considerable headroom.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P174, with no benchmark scores, cannot claim any measured performance wins. Its strengths lie in efficiency and specialized embedded applications. The 28 TDP, compared to the Ryzen 7 260's 45 TDP, suggests a design focused on lower power envelopes, which suits fanless or compact embedded systems. The processor's architecture, Zen 5 / Zen 5c, indicates a hybrid design where performance and efficiency cores coexist, a common approach for balancing throughput with power draw in always-on or thermally constrained environments.

The use-case split is therefore clear: the Ryzen 7 260 is for users who prioritize peak performance in active, bursty workloads, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P174 targets sustained, low-power operation in industrial or AI-oriented embedded deployments where benchmark scores are secondary to reliability and thermal stability.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in their underlying designs despite sharing the same socket and process node. Both use AMD Socket FP8 and are built on a 4 nm TSMC process, but the similarities end there.

The Ryzen 7 260 uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its cache hierarchy features 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The die size is 178 mm², and the transistor count is 25,000 million. The processor supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported. The integrated graphics are Radeon 780M.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses the Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture under the Gorgon Point codename. It has 10 cores and 20 threads, exceeding the Ryzen 7 260 in core and thread counts. However, its base clock drops to 2.00 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The cache layout changes as well: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The die size is larger at 233 mm². The transistor count is not recorded. Memory support expands to both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, still dual-channel with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported, a key feature for embedded reliability. The integrated graphics are Radeon 880M.

The PCIe configurations also differ: the Ryzen 7 260 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen AI Embedded P174 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The core count advantage, the hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c design, the lower base clock, the larger die, the memory flexibility, and the ECC support all point to a processor engineered for embedded workloads that prioritize throughput per watt and data integrity over raw clock speed.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Ryzen 7 260 is the clear choice for any application where measured performance is the primary criterion. Its benchmark scores place it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 43717. The nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 with an average score of 43704 and a delta of 0 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 7 170 with an average score of 43689 and a delta of 0.1 percent. This cluster indicates that the Ryzen 7 260 sits in a competitive performance band, slightly ahead of or on par with near-peer processors.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has no benchmark scores and a percentile of 50, with an average benchmark score of 0. The database records no wins for either processor in head-to-head benchmarks, as the comparison list is empty. This absence of measured data means the P174 cannot be validated as a performance leader in any category. Its merits are architectural: more cores (10 vs. 8), more threads (20 vs. 16), ECC memory support, and a lower TDP (28 vs. 45) for embedded longevity.

For a user selecting between these two, the data favors the Ryzen 7 260 for general computing, content creation, and any workload where benchmark scores translate to real-world speed. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is appropriate for embedded systems where the 28 TDP, the Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid core design, and ECC memory are more important than raw benchmark results. The P174's lack of recorded scores does not mean it is slow; it means the database cannot attest to its performance, so any performance claim for it would be speculative.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for both processors?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 7 260 does not.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 has a TDP of 45, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a TDP of 28.

Q: Do both processors use the same process node?

A: Yes, both are built on a 4 nm process node from TSMC.

Q: Which processor has recorded benchmark scores?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 7 260 has recorded benchmark scores. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has no entries in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, meaning no direct comparison tests exist between the Ryzen 7 260 and the Ryzen AI Embedded P174. This is a notable gap in the data, as it prevents a direct apples-to-apples performance verdict. Without these results, the analysis must rely on the Ryzen 7 260's standalone scores and the P174's architectural specifications.

The Ryzen 7 260's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17211.5 and single-core score of 1770.5 demonstrate a strong balance. In Passmark tests, the processor scores 351517 in data compression, 20267 in data encryption, 26544 in extended instructions, 77 in find prime numbers, 59462 in floating point math, 96737 in integer math, 28078 in multithread, 1218 in physics, 42383 in random string sorting, and 3736 in single-thread. These figures show consistent performance across varied workload types, from integer and floating-point math to memory-heavy sorting tasks.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P174, with no benchmark scores, cannot be placed against these numbers. The only quantitative comparison available is architectural: the P174 has 2 more cores and 4 more threads, a larger die (233 mm² vs. 178 mm²), and a lower base clock (2.00 GHz vs. 3.80 GHz). Its boost clock is close, within 0.10 GHz of the Ryzen 7 260. The P174 also supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the Ryzen 7 260 supports only DDR5. These differences suggest the P174 might handle highly parallel workloads well due to its core count, but no data confirms this.

The absence of head-to-head scores also means the percentile comparison is lopsided. The Ryzen 7 260 sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the P174 sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0. This does not prove the P174 is half as capable; it reflects a lack of measurement. The database records what it records, and for the P174, that is nothing.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Ryzen 7 260 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174:

• Cores: 8 (Ryzen 7 260) vs. 10 (P174)
• Threads: 16 vs. 20
• Base Clock: 3.80 GHz vs. 2.00 GHz
• Boost Clock: 5.10 GHz vs. 5.00 GHz
• TDP: 45 vs. 28
• Architecture: Zen 4 vs. Zen 5 / Zen 5c
• Codename: Hawk Point vs. Gorgon Point
• Die Size: 178 mm² vs. 233 mm²
• Transistors: 25,000 million vs. not recorded
• L1 Cache per core: 64 KB vs. 80 KB
• Memory Support: DDR5 vs. DDR5, LPDDR5X
• ECC Memory: false vs. true
• PCIe Lanes (CPU only): Gen 4, 20 Lanes vs. Gen 4, 16 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 780M vs. Radeon 880M
• Release Date: 2025-01-05 vs. 2026-02-28
• Part Number: 100-000001724 vs. unknown

Fields that are identical include the socket (AMD Socket FP8), process node (4 nm), foundry (TSMC), L2 cache per core (1 MB), L3 cache (16 MB shared), memory bus (dual-channel), memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s), market segment (Mobile), production status (Active), and the fact that both have a locked multiplier. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP. These shared traits establish a common foundation, but the divergences in core count, clock speeds, power envelope, cache layout, and memory features define their separate purposes.