AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 comes from the PassMark suite, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has no benchmark entries in the database. This means the head-to-head comparison is one-sided: the P164 has eleven measurable scores, and the 9900X has none. With zero recorded wins for the 9900X and zero recorded wins for the P164 in the head-to-head field, the comparison relies entirely on the P164's absolute scores and its position relative to other CPUs in the database.

The P164's strongest result is in data compression, where it scores 327,891. This is far above its other integer-heavy workloads. Data encryption returns 16,055, and extended instructions reach 24,193. The floating-point math score is 55,799, while integer math is higher at 87,940. Random string sorting produces 34,801. The multi-thread score is 25,889, and the single-thread score is 4,029. Physics simulation returns 1,210, and finding prime numbers is the lowest at 71.

The average benchmark score for the P164 is 52,901. This places it at the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. That percentile is a strong indicator: the P164 sits above 90% of all recorded processors. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F with an average score of 52,873, the Intel Xeon 634 with 52,974, the AMD EPYC 7313P with 53,206, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X with 53,288. The P164 is 0.1% ahead of the Ryzen 5 9500F, 0.1% behind the Intel Xeon 634, 0.6% behind the EPYC 7313P, and 0.7% behind the Ryzen 9 7900X. These deltas are narrow, indicating the P164 clusters tightly with those four processors in overall average score.

The 9900X has no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals. Its percentile is 50, which is the median default for an unmeasured part. Therefore, no direct numeric comparison between the two is possible. The data shows that the P164 is a measured, competitive part, while the 9900X is uncharacterized in this database.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164?

A: The P164 has an average benchmark score of 52,901, placing it at the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the 9900X has an empty benchmarks list, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals in the database.

Q: Which processor has a higher core count?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads, whereas the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How do the two processors compare in boost clock speed?

A: The 9900X boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the P164 boosts to 5.00 GHz. The base clock is also different: 4.40 GHz for the 9900X versus 2.00 GHz for the P164.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power between the two?

A: The P164 has a TDP of 28 watts, while the 9900X has a TDP of 120 watts. The P164 uses substantially less power.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: The 9900X supports PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The P164 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs share the same process node and foundry. Both are built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. However, their codenames and generations differ. The P164 uses the codename Gorgon Point and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation, which includes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The 9900X uses the codename Granite Ridge and belongs to the Ryzen Embedded generation, specifically Zen 5 (Granite Ridge).

The physical die size differs substantially. The P164 has a single die of 233 mm². The 9900X has two dies, each 70.6 mm², for a combined die area of roughly 141.2 mm². The 9900X also has a recorded transistor count of 16,630 million, while the P164 has no transistor count in the database.

Core configuration differs. The P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads. Both processors share the same L1 cache size of 80 KB per core and the same L2 cache size of 1 MB per core. The L3 cache differs significantly: the P164 has 8 MB total L3, while the 9900X has 64 MB total L3. No v-cache 3D data is recorded for either part.

The integrated graphics differ. The P164 uses the Radeon 880M, while the 9900X uses the generic Radeon Graphics. The P164 is a mobile segment part, while the 9900X is a desktop segment part. The socket also differs: the P164 uses AMD Socket FP8, and the 9900X uses AMD Socket AM5.

The P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory. The 9900X supports DDR5 only. Both are dual-channel with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

The PCIe generation and lane count differ. The P164 uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The 9900X uses Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The multiplier unlock status differs as well: the P164 is locked, while the 9900X is unlocked.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors, based solely on the recorded data.

• Cores: The P164 has 8 cores, the 9900X has 12 cores.
• Threads: The P164 has 16 threads, the 9900X has 24 threads.
• Base Clock: The P164 runs at 2.00 GHz, the 9900X at 4.40 GHz.
• Boost Clock: The P164 boosts to 5.00 GHz, the 9900X to 5.60 GHz.
• TDP: The P164 uses 28 watts, the 9900X uses 120 watts.
• Socket: The P164 uses AMD Socket FP8, the 9900X uses AMD Socket AM5.
• Codename: The P164 is Gorgon Point, the 9900X is Granite Ridge.
• Generation: The P164 is Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), the 9900X is Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5 (Granite Ridge)).
• Transistors: The 9900X has 16,630 million; the P164 has no recorded value.
• Die Size: The P164 is 233 mm², the 9900X is 2x 70.6 mm².
• L3 Cache: The P164 has 8 MB, the 9900X has 64 MB.
• Memory Support: The P164 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, the 9900X supports DDR5 only.
• PCIe: The P164 is Gen 4 with 16 lanes, the 9900X is Gen 5 with 24 lanes.
• Integrated Graphics: The P164 uses Radeon 880M, the 9900X uses Radeon Graphics.
• Market Segment: The P164 is Mobile, the 9900X is Desktop.
• Release Date: The P164 was released on 2026-03-08, the 9900X on 2025-10-06.
• Multiplier Unlocked: The P164 is locked, the 9900X is unlocked.
• Part Number: The P164 is unknown, the 9900X is 100-000000662E.
• Benchmark Scores: The P164 has eleven recorded scores; the 9900X has none.
• Percentile: The P164 is at the 91st percentile, the 9900X at the 50th.
• Average Benchmark Score: The P164 averages 52,901, the 9900X averages 0.
• Nearest Rivals: The P164 has four listed rivals, the 9900X has none.

The Verdict

The database paints a clear picture of two very different processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is a measured, high-performing part. Its average benchmark score of 52,901 places it at the 91st percentile, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of its score. The P164 is competitive with the Ryzen 5 9500F, the Intel Xeon 634, the EPYC 7313P, and the Ryzen 9 7900X. It achieves this with a 28-watt TDP, making it a low-power mobile part with 8 cores and 16 threads.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X is a higher-core-count desktop part with 12 cores, 24 threads, a 120-watt TDP, and a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz. It also carries a much larger L3 cache of 64 MB versus 8 MB. However, the database contains no benchmark scores for this processor. Its average score is 0, its percentile is the default 50, and it has no rivals listed.

For users who need measured performance data, the P164 is the only option with recorded results. The data shows it is a strong performer relative to the CPUs near its average score. The 9900X, by contrast, has no recorded performance evidence in this database. The 9900X offers more cores, more cache, and a higher clock, but those specifications do not translate into measured scores here.

The choice depends on what the data supports. The P164 is for workloads where the recorded benchmarks matter and where the 91st percentile ranking is relevant. The 9900X is for users who prioritize the higher core count, larger cache, and unlocked multiplier, accepting that no benchmark data is available to confirm its performance. The P164 is the validated part, the 9900X is the unverified one. The data does not allow a direct performance comparison, so the verdict rests on the presence of measurements versus their absence.

The P164 also offers lower power consumption at 28 watts, which aligns with its mobile segment. The 9900X at 120 watts targets desktop use. The P164 supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the 9900X supports DDR5 only. The 9900X has PCIe Gen 5 with more lanes, while the P164 stays at Gen 4 with fewer lanes.

In terms of release timing, the 9900X was released earlier, on 2025-10-06, while the P164 came later, on 2026-03-08. Both are active production parts. The P164 is locked, the 9900X is unlocked. The 9900X has a recorded part number, the P164 does not.

Ultimately, the data supports two distinct profiles. The P164 is a measured, efficient, mobile-class processor with solid benchmark results and a high percentile ranking. The 9900X is a specification-rich desktop processor with more cores, more cache, and higher clocks, but it lacks any recorded performance metrics. The verdict from the data is straightforward: choose the P164 for verified performance, choose the 9900X for the raw specification sheet. Without benchmarks for the 9900X, any performance claim for it remains unsupported by the database.