AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core 3 100HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins all 11 shared benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 100HL. The largest margin comes in extended instructions, where the AMD part scores 24,193 versus 12,463, a 94.1% advantage. This category typically reflects SIMD and specialized workload efficiency, and the gap here is the widest of any test in the comparison set.

Data compression also heavily favors AMD, with a score of 327,891 against Intel's 202,225, a 62.1% difference. Integer math follows with 87,940 versus 56,308, a 56.2% lead. Random string sorting shows a 49.9% advantage (34,801 to 23,223), while prime number finding lands at 47.9% (71 to 48). Multithread performance is 47.2% higher for AMD (25,889 to 17,586), confirming that the extra threads matter in sustained parallel work.

The smallest win for AMD is single-thread performance, at 4,029 versus 3,735, a 7.9% edge. This is still a clear victory, but it indicates that the Intel part is closer in lightly threaded tasks. Floating-point math shows a 32.5% gap (55,799 to 42,108), and data encryption is 34.2% higher for AMD (16,055 to 11,964). Physics simulation rounds out the sweep with AMD at 1,210 versus 928, a 30.4% lead.

The average benchmark score reinforces the pattern. AMD's average is 52,901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. Intel's average is 23,545, at the 76th percentile. The nearest rivals for AMD include the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F (average 52,873, 0.1% lower) and the Intel Xeon 634 (52,974, 0.1% higher), so the P164 sits in a performance tier near those desktop and server parts. Intel's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U (23,709, 0.7% higher) and the Intel Core i5-11500 (23,718, 0.7% higher), meaning the Core 3 100HL is competitive with older mid-range desktop silicon.

Where Each One Wins

AMD wins every measured category, so the use-case split is defined by the degree of dominance rather than by any Intel victory. The strongest case for the Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is compute-heavy work: extended instructions, integer math, and data compression. The 94.1% extended instruction lead and 56.2% integer math lead make it the clear choice for encryption, compression pipelines, and any workload that relies on wide SIMD execution.

The multithread score of 25,889 versus 17,586 gives AMD a 47.2% advantage in fully threaded rendering, compilation, or simulation tasks. Its 16 threads versus 12 threads directly explain part of that gap, along with the higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

Intel does have a narrow margin in single-thread performance, but the gap is only 7.9% in AMD's favor. For workloads that are almost entirely single-threaded, the Core 3 100HL is closer to competitive, but it still loses. The Intel part's higher base clock of 2.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz does not translate into a single-thread win in the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. AMD uses the Gorgon Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The generation is listed as "Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c)", indicating a hybrid core arrangement within the Zen 5 family. Intel uses the Raptor Lake-PS architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, with the generation listed as "Core 3 (Raptor Lake-PS)".

Cache hierarchies differ notably. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core, but AMD has 1 MB of L2 per core while Intel has 2 MB per core. The L3 cache is also different: AMD has 8 MB total, while Intel has 12 MB shared. Despite having less cache, AMD still wins all benchmark comparisons, suggesting that its memory bandwidth and core efficiency compensate. AMD's memory bandwidth is listed at 89.6 GB/s, while Intel's bandwidth figure is not recorded in the database.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 880M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. Neither part's iGPU performance is directly benchmarked in this comparison set, but the architectural difference is significant for embedded and desktop systems that rely on integrated display output.

AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. This makes AMD the more robust option for reliability-sensitive embedded deployments where memory corruption is a concern.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are close but not identical. Both have 8 cores, but AMD has 16 threads while Intel has 12. This means AMD has simultaneous multithreading on all cores, while Intel has fewer threads than cores times two, reflecting its hybrid P-core/E-core arrangement.

Base clocks are nearly equal: AMD at 2.00 GHz, Intel at 2.10 GHz. Boost clocks differ more meaningfully, with AMD at 5.00 GHz and Intel at 4.60 GHz. The 0.40 GHz boost advantage helps explain AMD's single-thread lead.

Thermal design power is one of the largest specification gaps. AMD is rated at 28 W, while Intel is rated at 45 W. The AMD part delivers higher benchmark scores at a lower TDP, which is a notable efficiency result. Intel's socket is LGA 1700, while AMD uses Socket FP8. Both use PCIe Gen 4, but AMD has 16 CPU lanes versus Intel's 8.

Memory support diverges: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. AMD has ECC support, Intel does not. AMD's memory bandwidth is recorded at 89.6 GB/s, Intel's is not recorded. Intel's L3 cache is 12 MB versus AMD's 8 MB, and Intel's L2 is 2 MB per core versus AMD's 1 MB per core.

The market segments differ. AMD is listed as Mobile, while Intel is listed as Desktop. Both are active production parts. AMD's release date is later, and Intel's is earlier, but no pricing data is available for either.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 16 threads on 8 cores. The Intel Core 3 100HL has 12 threads on 8 cores.

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

A: AMD scores 4,029 in the PassMark single-thread test, while Intel scores 3,735. That is a 7.9% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel processor have a larger cache?

A: Yes. Intel has 2 MB of L2 per core and 12 MB of shared L3. AMD has 1 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of L3.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 100HL does not.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: AMD uses a 4 nm process at TSMC. Intel uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: AMD is rated at 28 W, while Intel is rated at 45 W. AMD delivers higher benchmark scores at the lower power rating.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 outperforms the Intel Core 3 100HL in every recorded test, with margins ranging from 7.9% in single-thread work to 94.1% in extended instructions. The average benchmark score of 52,901 versus 23,545 places AMD in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while Intel sits at the 76th percentile.

For workloads that stress integer math, compression, encryption, or multithreaded execution, the AMD part is the stronger choice by a wide margin. Its 16 threads, higher boost clock, and 4 nm process give it both a performance and efficiency advantage. The 28 W TDP versus 45 W TDP means it achieves those results while drawing less power in the rated specification.

For systems that require DDR4 memory compatibility or a desktop LGA 1700 socket, the Intel part has the matching platform features. Its 12 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 are larger than AMD's cache allocation. But in terms of raw benchmark output, the recorded data shows no category where Intel wins.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the correct pick for embedded and mobile designs where compute density, ECC memory support, and lower power draw matter. The Intel Core 3 100HL remains a viable desktop-oriented part for platforms that need DDR4 support or Intel's socket ecosystem, but the performance comparison in the database does not favor it.