AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread configuration difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X has 16 cores and 32 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X boosts up to 5.70 GHz. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 boosts up to 5.00 GHz.

Q: How do their thermal design power ratings compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X has a TDP of 170 watts. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has a TDP of 28 watts.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X has 64 MB of L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 MB of L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X supports PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What are the market segments for these chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X is a Desktop processor. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is a Mobile processor.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a complete sweep in the head-to-head benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X wins all 11 tests, with winsA equal to 11 and winsB equal to 0. The database positions the Ryzen 9 9950X at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P164 sits at the 91st percentile. Despite the narrow percentile gap, the average benchmark scores diverge sharply: 74640 for the 9950X versus 52901 for the P164, a difference of roughly 21739 points.

This is not a close contest. The Ryzen 9 9950X is the choice for any workload that prioritizes raw throughput, multi-threaded performance, or single-thread speed. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9745 with an average score of 74761 and a delta of -0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 475 with an average score of 74496 and a delta of 0.2%. The 9950X sits within a tight cluster of high-end parts, with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 trailing by 1.1% and the AMD EPYC 4545P trailing by 1%.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P164 should be selected only for contexts where the 28-watt TDP and mobile form factor are mandatory. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F with an average score of 52873 and a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Xeon 634 with an average score of 52974 and a delta of -0.1%, and the AMD EPYC 7313P with an average score of 53206 and a delta of -0.6%. The P164 is competitive within its own power envelope, but it does not approach the 9950X in any measured metric.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results indicate a dominant performance from the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X across every recorded test. The largest margin appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the 9950X scores 345 against 71 for the P164, a delta of 385.9%. This is the single most lopsided result in the comparison.

In passmark_extended_instructions, the 9950X records 71564 versus 24193, a delta of 195.8%. Passmark_floating_point_math shows 159063 against 55799, a delta of 185.1%. Passmark_data_encryption delivers 44366 against 16055, a delta of 176.3%. Passmark_integer_math scores 242097 against 87940, a delta of 175.3%. Passmark_data_compression records 896544 against 327891, a delta of 173.4%.

The multi-threaded and physics tests follow the same pattern. Passmark_multithread shows 66030 versus 25889, a delta of 155.1%. Passmark_physics records 3279 against 1210, a delta of 171%. Passmark_random_string_sorting scores 94368 versus 34801, a delta of 171.2%.

The closest margin is in the single-thread tests. Passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread both show 4737 for the 9950X against 4029 for the P164, a delta of 17.6%. While the 9950X still wins, this smaller gap indicates that the P164's single-core performance is relatively more competitive than its multi-core showing. Still, the 9950X holds a clear advantage even in this category.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge in several fundamental specifications. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X uses 16 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ significantly: the 9950X runs at 4.30 GHz, the P164 at 2.00 GHz. Boost clocks also differ: 5.70 GHz versus 5.00 GHz.

Thermal design power shows the largest operational gap. The 9950X is rated at 170 watts, the P164 at 28 watts. This 142-watt difference explains why the P164 is classified as Mobile while the 9950X is Desktop.

Socket and platform details also differ. The 9950X uses AMD Socket AM5, while the P164 uses AMD Socket FP8. The 9950X supports PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only); the P164 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Memory support differs in scope. The 9950X supports DDR5. The P164 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus and show 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

The integrated graphics differ. The 9950X includes Radeon Graphics. The P164 includes Radeon 880M. The 9950X has an unlocked multiplier; the P164 does not. The 9950X has a launch MSRP of $649, while the P164 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the 4 nm process node at TSMC. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, part of the 9000 series. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses the Gorgon Point codename with a generation described as Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c). The P164's architecture field is listed as null in the database, but its generation indicates a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c design.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The 9950X has 16,630 million transistors. The P164 has no recorded transistor count. Die sizes also diverge: the 9950X uses a dual-die design with 2x 70.6 mm², while the P164 uses a single die of 233 mm². This reflects the different core counts and cache arrangements.

Cache hierarchies show a major architectural split. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache, however, is 64 MB on the 9950X versus 8 MB on the P164. This 8x difference in L3 capacity is a primary driver of the multi-threaded performance gap.

The 9950X's generation is listed as Ryzen 9 (Zen 5 (Granite Ridge)), while the P164's generation is Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c). The hybrid core structure on the P164 suggests a mix of performance and efficiency cores, although the database does not specify the exact core distribution. The 9950X uses a homogeneous high-performance core layout.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X wins in every measured workload category. For multi-threaded productivity, the data shows passmark_multithread at 66030 versus 25889, a delta of 155.1%. This makes the 9950X the clear choice for rendering, compilation, and any parallel compute task where the 170-watt TDP is acceptable.

For data-heavy operations, the 9950X leads in passmark_data_compression with 896544 versus 327891, and in passmark_data_encryption with 44366 versus 16055. The extended instruction workload shows 71564 versus 24193, indicating strong SIMD and vector processing capability on the 9950X.

For mathematical workloads, the 9950X dominates passmark_integer_math with 242097 versus 87940, and passmark_floating_point_math with 159063 versus 55799. The prime number finding test shows the largest gap at 345 versus 71.

For single-thread responsiveness, the 9950X records 4737 versus 4029 in passmark_single_thread, a delta of 17.6%. While this is the smallest margin, it still confirms the 9950X as the faster part for lightly threaded applications.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 does not win any recorded benchmark. Its role in the database is defined by its mobile classification and 28-watt TDP. The P164 is positioned for embedded or power-constrained systems where the 9950X's desktop socket and 170-watt rating are not viable. The P164's nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F and Intel Xeon 634, show average scores around 52873 and 52974, indicating that the P164 is competitive within its own power class. However, against the 9950X, the data shows no workload where the P164 delivers a higher score.