AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a complete benchmark suite for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has no recorded benchmark entries. This asymmetry defines the entire comparison. The P164's average benchmark score sits at 52901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs tracked in the database. The 9600X, lacking any benchmark data, holds a 50th percentile position with an average score of zero.

For the P164, the strongest recorded result comes from the PassMark data compression test, where it scores 327891. This figure towers over its other workload results by an order of magnitude, indicating exceptional performance in compression-oriented tasks. The data encryption test returns 16055, while extended instructions score 24193. Integer math reaches 87940, and floating point math lands at 55799. The multithread score is 25889, with single-thread performance recorded at 4029. Additional results include random string sorting at 34801, physics at 1210, and find prime numbers at 71.

The nearest rival data for the P164 provides useful context. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F posts an average score of 52873, a delta of just 0.1 percent against the P164. The Intel Xeon 634 averages 52974, which is 0.1 percent higher than the P164. The AMD EPYC 7313P averages 53206, putting it 0.6 percent ahead. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X averages 53288, a 0.7 percent advantage. These margins are remarkably tight, with the P164 effectively trading blows with four established desktop and server parts despite being a 28-watt embedded mobile chip.

Because the 9600X has no recorded scores, the head-to-head comparison cannot show direct workload victories in either direction. What the data does show is a clear gap in available measurements. The P164's 91st percentile rank versus the 9600X's 50th percentile rank reflects the presence or absence of testing data rather than a direct performance comparison. The P164's average score of 52901 is within one percent of three of its four nearest rivals, which suggests consistent throughput across diverse workloads. The 0.1 percent gap to the Ryzen 5 9500F and the 0.7 percent gap to the Ryzen 9 7900X indicate that the P164 competes in a performance band occupied by full-size desktop processors.

The multithread score of 25889 and single-thread score of 4029 combine to show a balanced design. The P164's 8 cores and 16 threads drive the multithread result, while its 5.00 GHz boost clock supports the single-thread figure. The physics test score of 1210 reflects sustained compute under simulated physical modeling, and the extended instructions score of 24193 demonstrates strong SIMD and vector processing capability. The data encryption result of 16055 and data compression result of 327891 round out a suite that shows no obvious weak point.

The Verdict

The database presents a clear situation: one processor has extensive measurements, the other has none. For applications requiring documented performance data, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the only option with verifiable results. Its 91st percentile ranking and average score of 52901 place it alongside the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F, Intel Xeon 634, AMD EPYC 7313P, and AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, all within a 0.7 percent band. This is a notable result for a mobile embedded processor with a 28 watt TDP.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X offers no recorded benchmark data. Its 50th percentile rank and zero average score mean no performance conclusions can be drawn from the database. What the specifications show is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop chip with a 65 watt TDP, a 5.40 GHz boost clock, and a 32 MB shared L3 cache. These are strong specifications on paper, but without measured results, the database cannot confirm their practical impact.

Data-driven selection favors the P164 for anyone requiring validated performance. The 9600X remains an unquantified option, suitable only for scenarios where raw specifications matter more than measured outcomes. The P164's benchmark suite shows particular strength in data compression and integer math, while maintaining competitive single-thread performance. The 9600X, with no scores, cannot be compared on any of these metrics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has an average benchmark score of 52901, placing it in the 91st percentile. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has an average benchmark score of zero, placing it in the 50th percentile.

Q: How does the P164 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The P164 is 0.1 percent ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F (52873 versus 52901), 0.1 percent behind the Intel Xeon 634 (52974), 0.6 percent behind the AMD EPYC 7313P (53206), and 0.7 percent behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (53288).

Q: What is the P164's best benchmark result?

A: The PassMark data compression test returns the highest score at 327891. The next highest is integer math at 87940, followed by floating point math at 55799.

Q: Does the 9600X have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has an empty benchmark array, a zero average score, and no nearest rivals recorded.

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

A: The P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The 9600X has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every specification field. The P164 uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the 9600X uses 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: the P164 runs at 2.00 GHz, the 9600X at 3.90 GHz. Boost clocks see the 9600X ahead at 5.40 GHz versus 5.00 GHz for the P164.

Thermal design power shows a major split. The P164 draws 28 watts, the 9600X draws 65 watts. Sockets differ as well: the P164 uses AMD Socket FP8, the 9600X uses AMD Socket AM5. The P164 is classed as a mobile part, the 9600X as a desktop part.

Cache configurations differ in L3 capacity. The P164 has 8 MB of L3 cache, while the 9600X has 32 MB of shared L3 cache. Both share the same per-core L1 (80 KB) and L2 (1 MB) allocations. Memory support overlaps on DDR5, but the P164 adds LPDDR5X support. Both use dual-channel memory buses with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity diverges significantly. The P164 uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The 9600X uses Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: the P164 includes a Radeon 880M, while the 9600X includes a generic Radeon Graphics solution.

The 9600X has an unlocked multiplier, the P164 does not. The 9600X carries part number 100-000001405E; the P164's part number is listed as unknown. Release dates also differ. The P164 entered production with a release date of March 8, 2026, while the 9600X was released on October 6, 2025.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use TSMC's 4 nm process node, but their underlying designs diverge. The P164 belongs to the Gorgon Point generation, described as Ryzen AI Embedded with a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c core arrangement. The 9600X belongs to the Granite Ridge generation, using Zen 5 cores only. The P164's die size is 233 mm², while the 9600X's die size is 70.6 mm². The 9600X has a recorded transistor count of 8,315 million; the P164 has no transistor count listed.

The P164's hybrid core design pairs Zen 5 performance cores with Zen 5c efficiency cores within the same 8-core, 16-thread configuration. This architecture targets power efficiency, consistent with its 28 watt TDP and mobile market segment. The 9600X's monolithic Zen 5 design across 6 cores and 12 threads targets higher clock speeds, evident in its 3.90 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost.

L3 cache represents a key architectural difference. The P164 has 8 MB of total L3 cache, while the 9600X has 32 MB of shared L3 cache. This fourfold difference in last-level cache capacity reflects the 9600X's desktop positioning, where larger cache pools help feed high-frequency cores. The P164's smaller L3 cache aligns with its power-constrained mobile role.

The P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, giving it flexibility for compact embedded systems. The 9600X supports DDR5 only. PCIe generation also separates the two: the P164 uses Gen 4, the 9600X uses Gen 5, with the 9600X also offering more lanes (24 versus 16). The P164's Radeon 880M integrated graphics represents a specific mobile-grade GPU, while the 9600X's Radeon Graphics is listed generically.

The 9600X's unlocked multiplier enables overclocking support, a feature absent from the P164. The P164's FP8 socket ties it to AMD's mobile platform ecosystem, while the 9600X's AM5 socket connects to the desktop platform. Both processors support ECC memory, both use dual-channel memory buses, and both share the same 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth figure. The production status for both is listed as Active, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP.