AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core 7 250H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear split between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 and the Intel Core 7 250H, with Intel claiming the majority of direct comparisons. Out of 11 head-to-head tests, the Intel part wins 8, while the AMD part wins 3. However, the margin of victory varies significantly by workload.

The largest single win for AMD comes in extended instructions, where the Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 24,193 against Intel's 17,318, a 39.7% advantage. This is the most decisive result in either direction across the entire test suite. The second AMD victory is in data compression, where the P164 scores 327,891 versus 303,269, a 8.1% lead. The third is a narrower win in random string sorting, with 34,801 versus 34,136, a 1.9% margin.

Intel's wins are more numerous but generally smaller in percentage terms. The largest Intel advantage is in physics, where the Core 7 250H scores 1,824 against AMD's 1,210, a 33.7% lead. The find prime numbers test also shows a substantial Intel edge, 106 versus 71, a 33% difference. Floating point math goes to Intel by 14.3%, with scores of 65,094 and 55,799. Data encryption favors Intel at 18,206 against 16,055, an 11.8% margin. Integer math shows Intel ahead by 11.3%, scoring 99,100 versus 87,940.

Multithread performance is closer, with Intel leading 27,030 versus 25,889, a 4.2% difference. Single-thread performance also favors Intel, 4,148 versus 4,029, a 2.9% gap. The overall average benchmark score tells a different story, however: AMD's average is 52,901, while Intel's is 35,728. This discrepancy stems from the fact that the AMD database entry includes a different set of tests, including PassMark-only metrics, whereas the Intel entry also includes Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 results. The Cinebench scores for Intel are 3,147 (R15 multicore), 298 (R15 singlecore), 9,697 (R20 multicore), 1,368 (R20 singlecore), 16,561 (R23 multicore), and 1,931 (R23 singlecore).

In terms of percentile ranking, the AMD part sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 85th. The nearest rival for AMD is the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F, which is 0.1% higher in average score. For Intel, the closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, with a 0% delta, followed by the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H at 0.2% above.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the stronger choice for workloads that stress extended instruction sets, such as SIMD-heavy or specialized compute tasks. The 39.7% lead in extended instructions is the standout result, suggesting the Zen 5 architecture handles these operations with notable efficiency. Data compression also favors AMD, making it suitable for archiving, database compression, or file-system tasks where that 8.1% advantage translates into faster throughput. Random string sorting, while a narrow win, still points to AMD having a slight edge in certain text-processing or sorting algorithms.

The Intel Core 7 250H dominates physics calculations, a proxy for gaming physics or simulation workloads, with a 33.7% margin. Prime number finding, another compute-heavy integer task, shows Intel ahead by 33%, indicating strength in number-theoretic or cryptographic-style workloads. Floating point math and integer math both favor Intel, with 14.3% and 11.3% leads respectively, which covers a broad range of scientific, engineering, and general-purpose number crunching. Data encryption is faster on Intel by 11.8%, which matters for VPN traffic, disk encryption, or secure communication protocols. Multithread and single-thread scores both favor Intel, meaning the Core 7 250H delivers higher peak throughput in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded scenarios, albeit by modest margins of 4.2% and 2.9%.

The use-case split is therefore clean: AMD wins where extended instructions and compression matter, Intel wins where raw integer, floating point, and physics performance dominate. For general productivity, the Intel part has a slight overall edge in the direct head-to-head tests, but the AMD part's higher percentile ranking and average score suggest it is a more balanced performer in the broader CPU landscape.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core 7 250H, by contrast, uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and is a Raptor Lake Refresh part. It is built on Intel's 10 nm process.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel part has 14 cores and 20 threads. This explains part of Intel's multithread advantage, though the 4.2% margin in that test is smaller than the core-count disparity might suggest, indicating AMD's Zen 5 cores are more efficient per thread.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. For L2, AMD provides 1 MB per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core, giving Intel a larger per-core L2. The L3 cache is a major difference: AMD has 8 MB, while Intel has 24 MB shared. This larger Intel L3 likely contributes to its wins in integer and floating point workloads where data reuse is common.

Memory support differs. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with dual-channel memory and a measured bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded, and it does not support ECC. The PCIe configuration also differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel uses Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics are another distinction. AMD uses the Radeon 880M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. Both are mobile-market segments, and both are production-active. The AMD part's release date is later, recorded as 2026-03-08, while Intel's is 2024-12-17. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $502, while the AMD part has no recorded MSRP. The Intel part has a part number SRQ6UQ5MK, while AMD's part number is listed as unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both use sockets specific to their respective platforms: AMD Socket FP8 for AMD, Intel BGA 1744 for Intel.

Clock speeds are recorded differently. AMD has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Intel has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The TDP also differs: AMD is rated at 28 W, while Intel is rated at 45 W. This means the Intel part draws more power, which is consistent with its higher core count and clock speeds, but it also implies a higher thermal requirement for cooling.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H scores 4,148 in the PassMark single-thread test, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 4,029, giving Intel a 2.9% advantage.

Q: How much faster is AMD in extended instructions?

A: AMD leads by 39.7% in the PassMark extended instructions test, scoring 24,193 versus Intel's 17,318.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 250H does not.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 MB.

Q: Does the Intel part have more cores?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads, compared to 8 cores and 16 threads for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164.

Q: Which processor has the higher percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 ranks at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 7 250H ranks at the 85th percentile.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture. The Intel Core 7 250H wins 8 of 11 direct head-to-head benchmarks, including all of the core compute-heavy tests: physics, prime numbers, floating point math, integer math, encryption, multithread, and single-thread. Its 14 cores, 20 threads, larger 24 MB L3 cache, and higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz all support this outcome. For users whose workloads are dominated by general computation, number crunching, or physics simulation, the Intel part is the stronger choice based on the recorded scores.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164, however, wins the extended instructions test by a wide 39.7% margin, which is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. It also wins data compression and random string sorting. Its 28 W TDP is lower than Intel's 45 W, and it supports ECC memory, which are meaningful for embedded or reliability-focused deployments. Its 91st percentile ranking also exceeds Intel's 85th, indicating that in the broader CPU population, AMD's average benchmark score of 52,901 places it higher than Intel's 35,728.

The verdict depends on the workload priority. For maximum raw compute across integer, floating point, and physics tasks, the Intel Core 7 250H is the clear pick from the head-to-head numbers. For specialized instruction-set performance, compression tasks, or environments where ECC memory and lower power draw are critical, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the better fit. The data does not support a single universal winner, but it does clearly delineate which processor should be selected for which type of use case.