AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data across all 11 shared PassMark tests shows a complete sweep for the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D. The recorded measurements indicate no test where the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 takes the lead. The largest gap appears in the prime number test, where the 9950X3D scores 613 versus 71 for the P164, a delta of 763.4%. This is the single biggest proportional advantage in the comparison and reflects a massive difference in raw integer workload throughput.

The multi-threaded results are similarly one-sided. The 9950X3D records 70,255 in PassMark multithread against 25,889 for the P164, a 171.4% advantage. The physics test shows an even wider relative gap: 5,670 versus 1,210, a 368.6% delta. Floating point math also heavily favors the desktop part, with 159,724 versus 55,799, a 186.2% lead. Integer math follows the same pattern: 243,209 versus 87,940, a 176.6% delta. The data confirms that the 9950X3D delivers more than double the throughput in several compute-heavy workloads.

The closest contest is single-thread performance. The 9950X3D scores 4,737 in PassMark single thread, while the P164 reaches 4,029. That is a 17.6% advantage, still a clear win for the desktop chip but far narrower than the multi-thread margins. The 9950X3D's higher boost clock of 5.70 GHz, compared to 5.00 GHz on the P164, likely explains a substantial portion of this gap, though the database does not isolate clock effects from architectural differences.

The remaining tests fall in between. Data compression shows 908,421 versus 327,891, a 177% delta. Data encryption records 44,536 versus 16,055, a 177.4% delta. Extended instructions deliver 73,011 versus 24,193, a 201.8% delta. Random string sorting shows 95,423 versus 34,801, a 174.2% delta. In every case, the 9950X3D roughly triples the P164's output or better.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The 9950X3D sits at 75,779, while the P164 averages 52,901. That difference places the 9950X3D in the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the P164 sits in the 91st percentile. Both are strong performers relative to the broader CPU field, but the gap between them is substantial.

Where Each One Wins

The 9950X3D wins in every benchmark category that the database records. Its largest advantages appear in multi-threaded and compute-heavy tasks. The physics simulation test, prime number finding, and extended instruction workloads show the biggest relative gaps, all above 200% or higher. These results point to use cases like rendering, scientific computing, and heavy compilation, where the full 16 cores and 32 threads can be utilized.

The 9950X3D also leads in memory-sensitive workloads. Data compression and random string sorting both show deltas around 174% to 177%, indicating that the 128 MB L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth provide a measurable edge in data movement tasks. The encryption test follows the same pattern.

The P164 does not win any recorded benchmark, but its single-thread score of 4,029 is respectable in absolute terms. The 17.6% gap in single-thread performance is the narrowest margin in the entire comparison. The P164's 5.00 GHz boost clock is high for a 28 W mobile part, and the data reflects that the architecture scales well in lightly threaded scenarios.

The P164's strength lies in its operating envelope rather than raw performance. With a 28 W TDP and an 8-core, 16-thread configuration, the recorded data shows a processor that delivers roughly 37% of the 9950X3D's multi-thread score (25,889 versus 70,255) while using a fraction of the power budget. The database does not include power consumption measurements, but the TDP figures alone indicate a fundamentally different design target.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use a 4 nm TSMC process, but they diverge sharply in every other architectural dimension. The 9950X3D is a 16-core, 32-thread Zen 5 part from the Granite Ridge codename, built for the AMD Socket AM5. The P164 is an 8-core, 16-thread part from the Gorgon Point codename, using a mix of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, and it mounts to the AMD Socket FP8. The generation field confirms the split: the 9950X3D belongs to the Ryzen 9 series in the 9000 series, while the P164 is part of the Ryzen AI Embedded line.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially. The 9950X3D carries 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, matching the P164's per-core L1 and L2 numbers. The L3 cache is where the gap appears: the 9950X3D has 128 MB of L3, while the P164 has only 8 MB. That 16x difference in L3 capacity has direct implications for workloads that exceed the smaller cache's working set.

The 9950X3D uses 16,630 million transistors spread across a dual-die design with each die measuring 70.6 mm². The P164 uses a single 233 mm² die. The database does not list a transistor count for the P164, but the die size difference suggests a very different integration strategy. The 9950X3D's dual-die approach allows for the larger core count and the massive L3 cache, while the P164's monolithic die pairs 8 cores with an integrated Radeon 880M GPU.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The 9950X3D supports Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes, while the P164 uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The memory controller on the 9950X3D accepts DDR5 only, while the P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and both support ECC memory.

The 9950X3D includes Radeon Graphics as its integrated GPU, while the P164 integrates the Radeon 880M. The desktop part has an unlocked multiplier, making it suitable for overclocking. The P164 has a locked multiplier. The 9950X3D's TDP is 170 W, while the P164 is rated at 28 W. The 9950X3D was released in January 2025 and carries the part number 100-000000719. The P164's release date is listed as March 2026, and its part number is listed as unknown.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D has 16 cores and 32 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The 9950X3D has 128 MB of L3 cache. The P164 has 8 MB. Both processors use 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The 9950X3D boosts to 5.70 GHz. The P164 boosts to 5.00 GHz. The base clocks are 4.30 GHz for the 9950X3D and 2.00 GHz for the P164.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory. Both also support dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, though the 9950X3D supports DDR5 only while the P164 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The 9950X3D scores 4,737 in PassMark single thread, while the P164 scores 4,029. That is a 17.6% advantage for the 9950X3D.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The 9950X3D has a 170 W TDP. The P164 has a 28 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base clock | 4.30 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.70 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 170 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Gorgon Point |

| Process node | 4 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | Not listed |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 233 mm² |

| L3 cache | 128 MB | 8 MB |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 lanes | Gen 4, 16 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Graphics | Radeon 880M |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier | Unlocked | Locked |

| Release date | January 2025 | March 2026 |

| Launch MSRP | $699 | Not listed |

| Part number | 100-000000719 | Unknown |

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear division of roles. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is the stronger processor in every measured benchmark, with advantages ranging from 17.6% in single-thread work to 763.4% in prime number finding. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, 128 MB L3 cache, and 170 W TDP place it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The 9950X3D's nearest rivals in the database, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D, sit within 0.1% of its average score, which shows that the 9950X3D is at parity with the strongest desktop parts available.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is not a competitive desktop processor by these measurements. It is a mobile embedded part with a 28 W TDP, 8 cores, 16 threads, and 8 MB of L3 cache. Its 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs is respectable, and its nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F and Intel Xeon 634, sit within 0.1% of its average score. The P164's single-thread score of 4,029 shows that the Zen 5 architecture scales down efficiently, but the multi-thread results confirm that the core count and cache limitations hold it back in heavy workloads.

The choice between these two parts depends entirely on the use case. For desktop workloads that can use 16 cores and 32 threads, the 9950X3D delivers roughly 2.7 times the multi-thread score of the P164 (70,255 versus 25,889) and more than 2.7 times the average benchmark score (75,779 versus 52,901). The P164, with its 28 W TDP and mobile socket, is built for embedded and low-power systems where the 170 W desktop part cannot operate. The 9950X3D also offers PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes, an unlocked multiplier, and a launch MSRP of $699, while the P164 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes and has a locked multiplier.

The database does not record any benchmark where the P164 outperforms the 9950X3D. For anyone comparing these two processors on performance alone, the 9950X3D is the only choice. The P164 exists in a different segment, defined by power efficiency and embedded deployment, and the benchmark numbers reflect that positioning.