AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X are both active AMD processors built on a 4 nm TSMC node, but they serve entirely different segments of the market. The data in the database shows a stark contrast in core counts, memory bandwidth, and benchmark scores, reflecting their distinct design goals: one is a low-power embedded processor, the other is a high-end desktop workstation part.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has an average benchmark score of 52901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X has an average score of 321753, placing it in the 99th percentile, which is roughly six times higher.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X has 64 cores and 128 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning the Threadripper offers eight times the core count and eight times the thread count.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: In the PassMark single-thread test, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X scores 4537, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 4029. This gives the Threadripper an 11.2% advantage in this metric.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X supports quad-channel memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, more than double the bandwidth of the embedded part.

Q: Which processor offers more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X provides Gen 5 with 80 lanes (CPU only). The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), a significant difference in both generation and lane count.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X have ECC memory support listed in their specifications.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is substantial. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation, which is based on a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c core configuration. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X uses the Shimada Peak codename and is based on the Zen 5 architecture within the Ryzen Threadripper 9000 series.

The process node is identical at 4 nm from TSMC, but the physical implementations differ greatly. The Threadripper 9980X has a transistor count of 66,520 million and a die size described as 8x 70.6 mm², indicating a multi-die design. The embedded P164 has a die size of 233 mm², and its transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The P164 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Threadripper 9980X has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 256 MB of L3 cache. This larger pool of L3 cache is a major factor in the Threadripper's ability to handle massive datasets.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The P164 includes a Radeon 880M iGPU, while the Threadripper 9980X has no integrated graphics (N/A), a common choice for high-end workstation parts that rely on discrete GPUs. The embedded part is classified as a Mobile segment processor, while the Threadripper is a Desktop segment part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In every recorded head-to-head benchmark, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is the winner. The most decisive victory comes in the PassMark data compression test, where the Threadripper scores 2974534 versus the P164's 327891, a delta of -89% (meaning the P164 is 89% behind). The data encryption test shows a similar trend, with the Threadripper at 157137 and the P164 at 16055, a -89.8% delta.

The multi-threaded workloads heavily favor the Threadripper. The PassMark multithread score is 141641 for the Threadripper versus 25889 for the P164, a -81.7% delta. The physics test follows with scores of 8001 and 1210 respectively, a -84.9% delta. The extended instructions test shows the Threadripper at 228959 against the P164's 24193, a -89.4% delta.

The gap narrows in the single-thread test, but the Threadripper still wins. It scores 4537 in PassMark single-thread versus the P164's 4029, a -11.2% delta. This indicates that while the Threadripper is a multi-core monster, its single-core advantage is far less pronounced. The remaining tests, including floating point math, integer math, find prime numbers, and random string sorting, all show the Threadripper with deltas ranging from -88.1% to -90.8%. The data confirms that the Threadripper 9980X is categorically faster in every measured workload, with its largest leads in heavily parallel tasks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: the Threadripper 9980X has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for the Threadripper and 2.00 GHz for the P164, with boost clocks of 5.40 GHz and 5.00 GHz respectively.

Power and socket requirements are also distinct. The Threadripper 9980X has a TDP of 350 W and uses AMD Socket sTR5, while the P164 has a TDP of 28 W and uses AMD Socket FP8. The Threadripper's multiplier is unlocked, whereas the P164's is locked. The Threadripper has a launch MSRP of $4999, while the P164 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Memory support differs, with the P164 supporting both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Threadripper supports DDR5 only. The memory bus is dual-channel on the P164 versus quad-channel on the Threadripper. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the P164 and Gen 5 with 80 lanes for the Threadripper. The P164 includes a Radeon 880M integrated GPU, while the Threadripper has none. The Threadripper also has a recorded part number (100-000001593), while the P164's part number is listed as unknown.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear segmentation. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is the dominant performer across all recorded benchmarks, with its 64 cores and 128 threads delivering an average score of 321753, which is a 99th percentile result. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (0.3% ahead), the Intel Xeon 6781P (2% ahead), the AMD EPYC 9575F (3.2% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 9734 (3.6% ahead).

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, posts an average score of 52901, placing it in the 91st percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F (0.1% ahead), the Intel Xeon 634 (0.1% behind), the AMD EPYC 7313P (0.6% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (0.7% behind). This places the P164 in a completely different performance class, one focused on efficiency and embedded use cases rather than raw throughput.

For workloads that demand maximum parallel processing, massive memory bandwidth (204.8 GB/s), and extensive PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, the Threadripper 9980X is the only choice between the two. For applications that prioritize low power consumption (28 W TDP), a compact mobile form factor, and an integrated GPU, the P164 is the appropriate option. The benchmark results indicate that selecting between these processors is a decision between two entirely different computing paradigms, not a comparison of similar parts.