AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the Intel Core 7 240H wins all eleven shared benchmark comparisons against the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132. The margin varies significantly by workload, ranging from a narrow single-thread edge to a massive gap in prime number finding.

The closest contest is in single-thread performance, where the Intel part scores 3782 against AMD's 3713, a delta of just 1.8%. This narrow margin indicates that for lightly threaded tasks, the two processors are nearly interchangeable in raw speed. The extended instructions test shows a similarly tight result, with Intel ahead by only 2.2% (16897 versus 16520).

The largest Intel advantage appears in the find prime numbers test, where it scores 102 versus AMD's 57, a 44.1% gap. This workload is highly sensitive to integer arithmetic efficiency and raw clock speed, and the Intel part's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 4.50 GHz likely drives much of this difference. Physics simulation shows a 40.7% delta in Intel's favor (1723 versus 1022), which aligns with the multithreaded nature of that test and the Intel chip's higher core and thread counts.

In floating-point math, Intel leads by 28.3% (58905 versus 42248), a substantial margin that speaks to sustained FP throughput. Integer math follows with a 22.6% advantage (80396 versus 62249). Data compression shows Intel ahead by 15.2% (271774 versus 230437), while random string sorting has the smallest multithreaded gap at 12.8% (28866 versus 25181).

Multithread performance, a key overall indicator, shows Intel at 23975 against AMD's 19262, a 19.7% delta. Data encryption shows Intel ahead by 24.5% (15155 versus 11444). The average benchmark score confirms the overall picture: Intel's 31483 sits 20.1% above AMD's 37804, though note that the averages include different test sets for each processor in the broader database.

The Intel part's percentile ranking against all CPUs is 82, while the AMD chip sits at 86, which shows that the AMD processor's average score is dragged down by its lower absolute scores in the PassMark suite compared to its nearest rivals, while the Intel part's average is closer to the performance of its own peer group. This is an unusual divergence, and it stems from the fact that the two chips occupy different performance brackets despite their benchmark head-to-head results.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H wins all 11 recorded head-to-head tests against the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, with no wins recorded for the AMD part.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H scores 3782 in the PassMark single-thread test versus 3713 for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, a difference of 1.8%. This is the smallest margin of any shared test.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two?

A: The find prime numbers test shows the largest delta, with Intel scoring 102 and AMD scoring 57, a 44.1% gap in Intel's favor.

Q: How do their multithread scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H scores 23975 in the PassMark multithread test, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scores 19262, giving Intel a 19.7% advantage.

Q: Do the average benchmark scores reflect the head-to-head results?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has a higher average benchmark score of 37804 versus 31483 for Intel, and AMD also holds a higher percentile rank (86 versus 82). The Intel part wins every direct comparison, but the AMD chip's average is boosted by its nearest rival group in the database.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H has a launch MSRP of $502. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the Intel Core 7 240H wins every measured workload category. There is no test in the shared set where the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 comes out ahead. This makes the use-case split straightforward: for any task that relies on the PassMark metrics recorded here, Intel holds the advantage.

The Intel part's largest margins appear in physics simulation (40.7% ahead), find prime numbers (44.1% ahead), and floating-point math (28.3% ahead). These results point to workloads involving scientific computation, simulation, and number crunching where sustained multi-core throughput matters. Its 10 cores and 16 threads provide more parallel resources than AMD's 6 cores and 12 threads, and the higher 5.20 GHz boost clock helps in bursty single-threaded scenarios as well.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 does not win a single direct benchmark, but its higher average score and percentile rank in the broader database indicate that its nearest rivals in the passmark hierarchy are faster than Intel's nearest rivals. This suggests that the AMD chip sits in a performance tier where its competition is stiffer, even though it loses to this specific Intel part. For a builder choosing between these two exact models, the data points entirely toward Intel for computational performance.

The Intel part also carries a 45 W TDP versus AMD's 28 W, which means it draws more power but delivers correspondingly higher scores. For users prioritizing raw throughput in the recorded tests, Intel is the clear choice. The AMD part's advantage lies outside the measured benchmarks, such as its lower power envelope and ECC memory support, which are discussed in the specification and architecture sections.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel Core 7 240H uses 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 uses 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz for Intel and 2.00 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 5.20 GHz for Intel and 4.50 GHz for AMD. The Intel part runs at a 45 W TDP, the AMD part at 28 W.

Memory support diverges: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, while AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The AMD part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while Intel's memory bandwidth is not listed in the database. ECC memory is supported on the AMD chip but not on the Intel chip. PCIe connectivity also differs, with Intel using Gen 5 with 8 CPU-only lanes and AMD using Gen 4 with 14 CPU-only lanes.

The integrated graphics are different as well: Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 64EU, while AMD uses Radeon 840M. Sockets are not interchangeable: Intel uses BGA 1744, AMD uses AMD Socket FP8. The release dates are also distinct, with Intel launching on 2024-12-17 and AMD on 2026-03-08. The Intel part has a known part number (SRQ6TQ5ML), while AMD's is listed as unknown. Both processors are locked with no unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 7 240H is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and belongs to the Core 7 generation described as Raptor Lake Refresh. Its process node is 10 nm, fabricated by Intel. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 / Zen 5c cores. Its process node is 4 nm, fabricated by TSMC. This is a significant process advantage for AMD: a 4 nm node versus Intel's 10 nm node typically means higher transistor density and better power efficiency, though the benchmark data shows Intel still wins on raw performance in this comparison.

Cache structures differ substantially. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part also has 80 KB of L1 per core, but only 1 MB of L2 per core, and its L3 cache is just 4 MB. This is a major difference: Intel's L3 cache is six times larger, and its per-core L2 is double. Larger caches often help with repeated data access patterns and can reduce memory latency, which may contribute to Intel's wins in data compression and integer math.

The Intel part uses Raptor Lake's hybrid architecture, which combines performance and efficiency cores, though the database does not break down the core types. The AMD part uses Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, indicating a mix of full-performance and compact cores. The AMD chip's ECC memory support and LPDDR5X compatibility suggest a design targeting embedded or reliability-focused applications, while Intel's DDR4 support and higher TDP point toward general mobile performance. The AMD part's PCIe Gen 4 with 14 lanes versus Intel's PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes indicates a different I/O philosophy: AMD offers more lanes at a slower speed, Intel offers fewer lanes at a faster speed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core 7 240H outperforms the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 in every recorded head-to-head test. The largest gaps are in prime number finding (44.1%), physics simulation (40.7%), and floating-point math (28.3%), while the smallest is in single-thread performance (1.8%). For anyone prioritizing raw computational throughput in the measured PassMark workloads, the Intel part is the stronger choice, and its 10-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.20 GHz boost clock and 24 MB of L3 cache provides a solid foundation for multithreaded and single-threaded tasks alike.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, however, has compensating attributes that the benchmarks do not capture. Its 4 nm process node, 28 W TDP, ECC memory support, and LPDDR5X compatibility make it suitable for power-constrained or reliability-focused embedded systems. Its higher average benchmark score and percentile rank (86 versus 82) indicate that it competes in a faster overall peer group, even though it loses to this specific Intel model. The AMD part also supports more PCIe lanes (14 versus 8), which could matter for systems with many peripherals.

The choice between these two depends on the use case. For a mobile workstation or high-performance laptop where sustained multi-core throughput is the priority, the Intel Core 7 240H delivers measurably better results across all recorded tests. For an embedded or edge deployment where power draw, ECC memory, and a modern 4 nm process are more important than raw benchmark scores, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 offers those features, though at a clear performance cost in every measured metric. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $502, while the AMD part has none recorded, so direct cost comparison is not possible from the database. The data says what it says: Intel wins on performance, AMD wins on power efficiency and platform features.