AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core 7 160UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 across all eleven shared benchmark tests. The Intel Core 7 160UL does not record a single win in the direct comparison. The largest margin appears in extended instructions, where the AMD part scores 24193 against 5832, a 314.8% advantage. This indicates a substantial lead in workloads that utilize advanced vector and cryptographic instruction sets, likely reflecting the newer Zen 5 architecture.

Data compression results are similarly lopsided. The AMD processor scores 327891 versus 108953 for the Intel part, a 200.9% difference. Random string sorting, a test sensitive to memory subsystem and core scheduling efficiency, shows the AMD chip ahead by 193.9%, with scores of 34801 and 11843 respectively. These two results together suggest that the AMD part handles data movement and compression algorithms with significantly higher throughput.

Multithreaded performance, a broad indicator of overall processing capability, favors the AMD chip by 134.4%, scoring 25889 against 11043. The gap narrows but remains substantial in floating-point math, where the AMD part scores 55799 versus 25670, a 117.4% lead. Integer math shows an 85.1% advantage for the AMD processor, with scores of 87940 and 47515. Encryption workloads follow the same pattern: the AMD part scores 16055, which is 124.7% higher than the Intel part's 7146.

The physics test, which often reflects scheduling and cache behavior under threaded loads, shows the AMD chip ahead by 47.7%, scoring 1210 versus 819. Prime number finding, a test that stresses integer throughput and branch prediction, shows a narrower but still clear 42% lead for the AMD part, with scores of 71 and 50. Even in single-threaded performance, where the Intel part's 5.20 GHz boost clock might be expected to help, the AMD processor wins by 18.8%, scoring 4029 versus 3391. This result is notable because the AMD boost clock is lower at 5.00 GHz, yet the architectural efficiency of the Zen 5 core still delivers a higher single-thread score.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 posts an average of 52901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 7 160UL averages 14232, putting it in the 69th percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals by average score include the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F at 52873, a 0.1% difference, and the Intel Xeon 634 at 52974, a -0.1% difference. The Intel part's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277, a -0.3% difference, and the Intel Core i5-10400F at 14185, a 0.3% difference. These positioning data confirm that the two processors sit in entirely different performance tiers within the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 records a single-thread score of 4029, while the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 3391. The AMD part leads by 18.8% in this test.

Q: How large is the multithread performance gap between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 25889 in the multithread test, compared to 11043 for the Intel Core 7 160UL. This is a 134.4% advantage for the AMD part.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has an average benchmark score of 52901, and the Intel Core 7 160UL has an average benchmark score of 14232. The AMD part sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits in the 69th percentile.

Q: Which processor wins the extended instructions test?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins with a score of 24193, against 5832 for the Intel Core 7 160UL. The delta is 314.8%, the largest margin in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Does the Intel processor win any of the shared benchmark tests?

A: No. The Intel Core 7 160UL loses all eleven head-to-head benchmark tests to the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has a TDP of 28 watts, and the Intel Core 7 160UL has a TDP of 15 watts.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins every workload category present in the recorded data. Its largest advantages appear in extended instructions (314.8% over the Intel part), data compression (200.9%), and random string sorting (193.9%). These are compute-heavy, data-intensive tasks where the combination of Zen 5 cores, 8 MB of L3 cache, and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth provides a clear edge. The encryption test shows a 124.7% lead, and floating-point math shows a 117.4% lead, indicating strong performance in scientific and cryptographic workloads as well.

The Intel Core 7 160UL does not win any benchmark category against the AMD part. Its closest relative performance comes in the prime number finding test, where it trails by 42%, and in the physics test, where it trails by 47.7%. Single-thread performance is also closer, at an 18.8% deficit, but still favors the AMD processor. The Intel part's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz does not translate into a winning score in any measured test.

For use cases that depend on raw throughput in multithreaded, encryption, or data-processing workloads, the AMD processor is the clear choice based on the measured data. The Intel part, with its lower TDP of 15 watts, may be relevant for power-constrained designs, but the benchmark data does not show any performance category where it takes the lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD part delivers higher multithread scores, reflecting the efficiency of its Zen 5 design. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for the AMD part and 1.80 GHz for the Intel part. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for the AMD part and 5.20 GHz for the Intel part.

TDP differs significantly: the AMD processor is rated at 28 watts, while the Intel processor is rated at 15 watts. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. Memory support also differs: the AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD part has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s; the Intel part has no memory bandwidth figure recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported by the AMD part but not by the Intel part.

PCIe lane counts differ as well. The AMD processor offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel processor offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: the AMD part uses Radeon 880M, and the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The market segments are different, with the AMD part classified as Mobile and the Intel part classified as Desktop. Release dates also differ: the AMD processor was released on 2026-03-08, and the Intel processor was released on 2024-04-07.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is built on the Gorgon Point platform, using a 4 nm process node from TSMC. Its generation is listed as Ryzen AI Embedded with Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The die size is recorded as 233 mm². Cache structure consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache.

The Intel Core 7 160UL is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename. It uses a 10 nm process node from Intel. No die size is recorded for the Intel part. Cache structure consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part therefore has a larger L2 allocation per core and a larger total L3 cache, yet it still trails the AMD part in every measured benchmark. The process node difference, 4 nm versus 10 nm, likely contributes to the AMD part's higher efficiency and performance density. The AMD part's newer Zen 5 architecture also supports a wider instruction set profile, as reflected in the extended instructions benchmark where it leads by 314.8%.