AMD Ryzen 7 8700F vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F is a desktop processor built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Phoenix, with 8 cores and 16 threads. It operates on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, features a base clock of 4.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and has a 65 W TDP. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is a mobile processor from the Gorgon Point codename, using a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c core arrangement with 10 cores and 20 threads. It runs on the AMD Socket FP8, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while its TDP is 28 W. The database records show the 8700F with an average benchmark score of 30,746 and a percentile rank of 82 among all CPUs. The P174 currently has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and a percentile rank of 50, meaning its performance profile is not yet established in the database.

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F has 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock?

A: The Ryzen 7 8700F has a base clock of 4.10 GHz, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz. Both share the same boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 7 8700F has a TDP of 65 W. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a TDP of 28 W, which is lower by 37 W.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Ryzen 7 8700F supports DDR5 only. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 includes Radeon 880M integrated graphics. The Ryzen 7 8700F has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: What is the socket requirement for each?

A: The Ryzen 7 8700F uses AMD Socket AM5. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses AMD Socket FP8.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Ryzen 7 8700F has a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger die size?

A: The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a die size of 233 mm². The Ryzen 7 8700F has a die size of 178 mm².

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 7 8700F is a desktop chip from the 8000 series, using the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC, and the database lists its transistor count as 25,000 million. The die size is 178 mm². Its cache structure includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The multiplier is unlocked, which allows overclocking. The processor is part of the Ryzen 7 generation with Zen 4 (Phoenix) as the generation label.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded series, with the Gorgon Point codename. It uses a hybrid core design, combining Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, which is a departure from the homogeneous Zen 4 cores of the 8700F. The process node is also 4 nm from TSMC, but the die size is larger at 233 mm². The transistor count is not recorded in the database. The cache layout differs: L1 is 80 KB per core, L2 is 1 MB per core, and L3 is 16 MB. The P174 has a locked multiplier, so it cannot be overclocked. The integrated graphics are Radeon 880M, while the 8700F has no integrated graphics.

The P174 is designed for mobile and embedded use, reflected in its Socket FP8 and lower TDP. The 8700F targets desktop builds with Socket AM5 and a higher TDP. Both are active production products, but the 8700F was released on March 31, 2024, while the P174 has a release date of February 28, 2026. The P174 supports ECC memory, which the 8700F does not. PCIe lane counts also differ: the 8700F has Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the P174 has Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain any head-to-head benchmark entries between these two processors. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty, and the win counts for both sides are zero. All performance data available comes from the Ryzen 7 8700F’s individual benchmark suite. The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

For the Ryzen 7 8700F, the recorded scores include a 3DMark 16-thread score of 7,883 and a single-thread score of 1,008. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score is 26,646 and the single-core score is 3,761. Cinebench R20 shows 11,191 for multicore and 1,579 for single-core. Geekbench results are 13,523 for multicore and 2,290 for single-core. Passmark tests show a multithread score of 30,893 and a single-thread score of 3,872. Other Passmark sub-tests include integer math at 100,371, floating point math at 62,629, data compression at 378,160, and data encryption at 22,117.

Because the P174 lacks any benchmark data, direct performance comparison is not possible from the database. The nearest rivals for the 8700F provide context for its standing. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS has an average score of 30,879, which is 0.4% lower than the 8700F’s 30,746. The Intel Core i5-13600H scores 30,548, which is 0.6% higher than the 8700F. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T scores 30,468, 0.9% higher. The Intel Core i7-13700TE scores 31,028, which is 0.9% lower than the 8700F. These deltas are small, placing the 8700F in a tightly contested performance band.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 8700F | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 4.10 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | AMD Socket FP8 |

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

| Codename | Phoenix | Gorgon Point |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| 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 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Radeon 880M |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2026-02-28 |

| Launch MSRP | $270 | None recorded |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

The 8700F has a higher base clock by 2.10 GHz, while the P174 has a lower base clock but compensates with more cores and threads. The P174 has 2 more cores and 4 more threads. The TDP difference is significant: the P174 draws 37 W less. The P174 also has a larger die and supports ECC memory and LPDDR5X, which the 8700F does not. The 8700F has more PCIe lanes (20 versus 16) and an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP for the 8700F is $270, while the P174 has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The Ryzen 7 8700F is the only one of the two with verified performance data. Its average benchmark score of 30,746 places it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals are within a narrow 0.9% range, indicating consistent mid-range desktop performance. The P174 has no benchmark scores, so its actual performance cannot be quantified from the database. The P174’s specifications suggest a different design goal: 10 cores, a 28 W TDP, ECC support, and Radeon 880M graphics point toward embedded or mobile workloads where power efficiency and integrated display output matter more than raw single-thread speed.

For a desktop builder, the 8700F offers a known quantity. Its 8 cores at 4.10 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost, combined with an unlocked multiplier, make it suitable for overclocking. The P174’s locked multiplier and lower base clock (2.00 GHz) mean it is not intended for that use case. The P174’s higher core count (10 versus 8) and higher memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s) are advantages, but without benchmark scores, those advantages remain theoretical. The database shows the 8700F as an active desktop product with a launch MSRP of $270, while the P174 has no such price recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 8700F wins in scenarios that depend on single-thread speed and overclocking. Its base clock is more than double that of the P174 (4.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz), and its boost clock is identical at 5.00 GHz. For applications that scale with clock speed, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tasks, the 8700F has a clear specification advantage. The unlocked multiplier allows users to push clocks higher, which the P174 cannot do. The 8700F also has more PCIe lanes (20 versus 16), which benefits add-in cards like high-end GPUs or NVMe adapters. Its 65 W TDP is higher, but that is typical for a desktop chip with a larger thermal budget.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P174 wins in power-constrained and embedded scenarios. Its 28 W TDP is less than half that of the 8700F, making it suitable for compact or passively cooled systems. The integrated Radeon 880M graphics remove the need for a separate GPU, which is important for mobile or embedded designs. The P174 supports ECC memory, providing error correction for reliability-sensitive workloads. Its hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c core layout offers 10 cores and 20 threads, which may help in multi-threaded tasks if the lower base clock does not become a bottleneck. The P174 also supports LPDDR5X memory, which is lower power and often used in mobile platforms. Its larger die size (233 mm²) suggests more complex silicon, but the database does not record its transistor count.

The memory bandwidth favors the P174 at 89.6 GB/s, which is 6.4 GB/s higher than the 8700F. This could matter for memory-bound embedded workloads. However, the 8700F has a higher average benchmark score and a percentile rank of 82 versus the P174’s 50. The P174’s percentile rank of 50 with no scores is a placeholder, not a measured result. The data shows no head-to-head wins for either processor, so any conclusion about which performs better overall must rely on the 8700F’s recorded benchmarks and the P174’s absence from the benchmark suite.