AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a fundamental asymmetry between these two mobile processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i has no benchmark scores in the database, while the Intel Core 7 240H has a substantial set of recorded measurements. This means the head-to-head comparison is one-sided: the Intel part holds every recorded performance data point, and the AMD part has no measurable results to compare against.

The Intel Core 7 240H delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15764 and a single-core score of 1719. In Cinebench R20, it scores 8562 multi-core and 1208 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 tests show 2360 multi-core and 249 single-core. These numbers indicate a processor that scales well with thread count, with the multi-core scores being roughly nine to ten times the single-core scores depending on the test version.

PassMark results for the Intel part further characterize its performance profile. The multi-thread score sits at 23975, while the single-thread score is 3782. Integer math reaches 80396, floating point math reaches 58905, and extended instructions score 16897. Data compression hits 271774, data encryption reaches 15155, and random string sorting lands at 28866. Prime number finding is the weakest subtest at 102, while physics scores 1723.

The AMD part has zero recorded benchmarks, zero average benchmark score, and no nearest rivals listed. Its percentile rank against all CPUs is 50, which in the database's framework places it at the midpoint of all processors, but this percentile is not supported by any actual test data. The Intel part, by contrast, holds an 82nd percentile rank, placing it above the majority of processors in the database. Its average benchmark score of 31483 places it within 0.1% of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H and Intel Core i5-13500, and within 0% of the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 and AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX.

The Intel Core 7 240H's nearest rivals show tight clustering. The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 scores 31473 with a delta of 0%, the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX scores 31495 with a delta of 0%, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H scores 31508 with a delta of -0.1%, and the Intel Core i5-13500 scores 31510 with a delta of -0.1%. These deltas indicate that the Core 7 240H sits essentially at parity with these four processors, with differences of one-tenth of a percent or less. This suggests that despite its 82nd percentile rank, the Core 7 240H is not a standout among its immediate peers; it is simply one of a cluster of similarly performing chips.

The absence of AMD data means no wins can be recorded for the AMD side. The wins counter for the Intel side is also zero because no direct head-to-head benchmark entries exist in the database. The comparison is therefore defined by what is measurable (Intel) and what is not (AMD). This is a notable finding: the AMD part's 50th percentile rank is unverified, and any claims about its performance would lack empirical support from the database.

FAQ

Q: Why does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i have no benchmark scores in the database?

A: The database lists zero benchmarks for the AMD part, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals. Its percentile rank of 50 is recorded without supporting test data, meaning its performance classification is provisional rather than measurement-based.

Q: What is the Intel Core 7 240H's strongest recorded benchmark result?

A: The highest recorded score is in PassMark data compression at 271774, followed by Cinebench R23 multi-core at 15764 and PassMark multi-thread at 23975. The weakest result is PassMark find prime numbers at 102.

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 240H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H has an average benchmark score of 31483. The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 scores 31473 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX scores 31495 (0% delta), the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H scores 31508 (-0.1% delta), and the Intel Core i5-13500 scores 31510 (-0.1% delta). All four rivals are within 0.1% of the Core 7 240H.

Q: What is the AMD part's production status and release date?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i is listed as Active in production, with a release date of 2026-03-08. The Intel Core 7 240H is also Active and released on 2024-12-17, making the Intel part significantly earlier in its lifecycle.

Q: Does the AMD part have an estimated price in the database?

A: The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. The Intel Core 7 240H has a launch MSRP of $502, which is the only pricing data available for either processor.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part has multiplierUnlocked set to false, and the Intel part also has multiplierUnlocked set to false.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 7 240H uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and belongs to the Core 7 generation described as Raptor Lake Refresh. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

The core configurations differ sharply. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part has 10 cores and 16 threads. This gives Intel a 4-core and 4-thread advantage in raw parallelism. The AMD part's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Intel part starts at 2.50 GHz base and boosts to 5.20 GHz. Both clock figures favor Intel, with a 0.50 GHz higher base and a 0.70 GHz higher boost.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel part has 2 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache difference is substantial: the AMD part has 4 MB total, while the Intel part has 24 MB shared. This 6x difference in L3 capacity is one of the largest architectural gaps between the two chips and likely contributes to Intel's recorded performance advantage in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support reveals another split. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and ECC support enabled. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but has no recorded memory bandwidth figure and no ECC support. The AMD part's ECC capability and higher-bandwidth mobile memory types position it for embedded and reliability-focused use cases.

PCIe connectivity differs in generation and lane count. The AMD part uses Gen 4 with 14 CPU-only lanes. The Intel part uses Gen 5 with 8 CPU-only lanes. Intel's Gen 5 interface offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD provides more lanes. The integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses the Radeon 840M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 64EU. Both are integrated solutions, but the database does not record benchmark scores for either GPU.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads; the Intel part has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.50 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. Thermal design power is 28 watts for AMD and 45 watts for Intel, a 17-watt gap that reflects the Intel part's higher clock speeds and core count but also implies higher cooling requirements.

The socket types are incompatible. AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, while Intel uses Intel BGA 1744. The process nodes differ: AMD is on 4 nm at TSMC, while Intel is on 10 nm at its own foundry. Cache configurations differ as described: L2 is 1 MB per core on AMD versus 2 MB per core on Intel, and L3 is 4 MB on AMD versus 24 MB shared on Intel.

Memory support differs in type and features. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with ECC; Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 without ECC. AMD records 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth; Intel records none. PCIe is Gen 4 with 14 lanes on AMD versus Gen 5 with 8 lanes on Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 840M versus Iris Xe Graphics 64EU.

Release dates are far apart: the AMD part launched on 2026-03-08, while the Intel part launched on 2024-12-17. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $502; the AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. The Intel part has a part number (SRQ6TQ5ML), while the AMD part's part number is listed as unknown. Both are mobile market segment parts with Active production status and locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 240H wins on every measurable performance dimension because it is the only part with recorded benchmark scores. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15764 and single-core score of 1719 demonstrate strong all-core and single-thread capability. The PassMark integer math score of 80396 and floating point math score of 58905 indicate robust general-purpose compute. Data compression at 271774 suggests strong throughput for compression workloads, while encryption at 15155 and extended instructions at 16897 show capable cryptographic and SIMD performance.

The Intel part also wins on core count, thread count, base clock, boost clock, L2 cache per core, L3 cache, and PCIe generation. Its 10 cores and 16 threads provide more parallel execution resources. The 5.20 GHz boost clock is the highest recorded frequency in this comparison. The 24 MB shared L3 cache is six times the AMD part's 4 MB, which likely benefits workloads with large working sets.

The AMD part wins on process node efficiency, using a 4 nm TSMC process versus Intel's 10 nm process. This gives AMD a manufacturing advantage in transistor density and power efficiency per unit area. The AMD part also wins on thermal design power at 28 watts versus 45 watts, indicating lower peak power draw. AMD supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not, making the AMD part suitable for error-sensitive embedded workloads. AMD also provides more PCIe lanes (14 versus 8) and supports LPDDR5X memory, which can offer lower latency for mobile memory access.

In terms of memory bandwidth, AMD records 89.6 GB/s, while Intel has no recorded figure, so the data shows AMD with a documented bandwidth advantage. The AMD part's release date of 2026-03-08 is later, meaning it represents a newer design generation, while the Intel part's 2024-12-17 release makes it a more established product.

The AMD part's 50th percentile rank, despite having no benchmarks, suggests the database places it at the median of all CPUs. The Intel part's 82nd percentile rank places it well above the median and among the top fifth of all processors. The Intel part's average benchmark score of 31483, with nearest rivals all within 0.1%, confirms it is a solid mid-to-high performer but not an outlier.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but incomplete picture. The Intel Core 7 240H is a fully measured processor with 16 recorded benchmark scores, an 82nd percentile rank, and an average score of 31483. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around it, with the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX and Intel Core Ultra 3 205 at exactly 0% delta and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H and Intel Core i5-13500 at -0.1%. This indicates the Core 7 240H performs at parity with a group of established mid-range and upper-mid-range processors.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i has no recorded benchmarks, no average score, and no nearest rivals. Its 50th percentile rank is unsupported by any test data in the database. This is not a statement about the chip's actual capability; it is a statement about the database's current coverage. The AMD part may be too new (release date 2026-03-08) or too niche for benchmark results to have been recorded yet.

For users choosing between these two parts, the Intel Core 7 240H is the only option with documented performance. Its 10 cores, 16 threads, 5.20 GHz boost, 24 MB L3 cache, and 45-watt TDP make it a known quantity for multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. The benchmark scores confirm it handles Cinebench rendering, PassMark math, compression, encryption, and sorting tasks with measurable results.

The AMD part offers different strengths on paper: a 4 nm process, lower 28-watt TDP, ECC memory support, LPDDR5X compatibility, and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. These specifications point toward embedded and reliability-focused deployments rather than raw performance. The absence of benchmarks means its actual performance is unverified in this database.

The verdict from the recorded data: choose the Intel Core 7 240H for any workload where measured performance matters. Choose the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132i only if the requirements prioritize ECC memory, lower power draw, newer process technology, or the embedded market segment, and if benchmark verification can be obtained from other sources. The 50th percentile rank for the AMD part, without supporting scores, should be treated as provisional until the database records actual test results. The Intel part's 82nd percentile rank, backed by 16 scores, is the only empirically supported performance claim in this comparison.