AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 records an average benchmark score of 52901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 360 averages 18374, which places it in the 72nd percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz for the Intel part.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 360 uses a single-channel memory bus, providing 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins 7 of the 11 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 7 360 wins 4 tests.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 includes ECC memory support, while the Intel Core 7 360 does not.

Q: What integrated graphics do each of these processors use?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses the Radeon 880M, while the Intel Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is built on the Gorgon Point architecture, using a Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid design. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture, part of the Core 5 generation, and is built on a 3 nm process at Intel.

The AMD part integrates 8 cores with 16 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyper-threading support. The AMD processor's cache layout uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. The Intel chip has a larger L1 at 192 KB per core and L2 at 2.5 MB per core, but its shared L3 is smaller at 6 MB.

The AMD processor supports dual-channel memory with ECC, while the Intel processor is single-channel with no ECC. PCIe lane counts also differ: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Both use different sockets: AMD Socket FP8 for the Ryzen part and Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 7 360. The AMD processor has a die size of 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 dominates in compute-heavy, multi-threaded workloads. Its wins include data compression, integer math, extended instructions, and random string sorting. The largest advantage comes in integer math, where it leads by 156.8%. It also shows a 129.5% lead in data compression, a 97.3% lead in random string sorting, and a 95.3% lead in extended instructions. These results indicate the AMD part is well suited for data processing, encryption, and general numerical workloads.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in single-threaded performance and prime number finding. It leads single-thread tests by 5.7%, with a score of 4274 versus 4029. In prime number finding, the Intel part scores 120 versus 71, a 40.8% advantage. The physics test is essentially a tie, with the Intel part ahead by 0.2% (1213 versus 1210). These results suggest the Intel part holds an edge in lightly threaded, latency-sensitive tasks.

The AMD processor also wins floating point math by 24.1% (55799 versus 44963) and data encryption by 43.8% (16055 versus 11164). Multi-thread performance favors AMD by 66.6% (25889 versus 15544). For workloads that scale with cores and threads, the AMD processor is clearly the stronger option.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks differ: AMD runs at 2.00 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.80 GHz for Intel.

Thermal design power differs significantly: the AMD part is rated at 28 W, while the Intel part is rated at 15 W. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP8; the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1516. Process nodes differ: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm from Intel.

Cache configurations differ in size and allocation. The AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB L3. The Intel part has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support is the same in type (DDR5, LPDDR5X), but the bus differs: dual-channel for AMD, single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth reflects this: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 59.7 GB/s for Intel.

ECC memory support is present on the AMD chip but absent on the Intel chip. PCIe lanes also differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 880M, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $426; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part number is SAE3E, while the AMD part number is unknown. Release dates differ: the AMD part is dated 2026-03-08, the Intel part is dated 2026-04-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in multi-threaded performance. In passmark_multithread, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 25889 against 15544 for the Intel Core 7 360, a 66.6% advantage. This gap is consistent with the core and thread count difference, as well as the higher boost clock on the AMD part.

The largest single delta appears in integer math. The AMD part scores 87940, while the Intel part scores 34238, giving AMD a 156.8% lead. Data compression also shows a wide margin: 327891 versus 142877, a 129.5% difference. Random string sorting follows with 34801 versus 17636, a 97.3% lead for AMD.

Extended instructions favor AMD by 95.3% (24193 versus 12390). Data encryption shows AMD ahead by 43.8% (16055 versus 11164). Floating point math is closer but still favors AMD by 24.1% (55799 versus 44963).

The Intel part wins single-thread tests by a moderate margin. Passmark_single_thread shows Intel at 4274 versus 4029 for AMD, a 5.7% lead. Prime number finding is a strong Intel win: 120 versus 71, a 40.8% advantage. Physics is nearly identical: Intel scores 1213, AMD scores 1210, a 0.2% difference.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the split. AMD's average of 52901 places it among rivals like the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F (52873, 0.1% behind) and the Intel Xeon 634 (52974, 0.1% ahead). Intel's average of 18374 sits near the Intel Core i3-13100 (18380, 0% difference) and the Intel Core 5 330 (18345, 0.2% ahead).

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the stronger processor for multi-threaded, data-intensive workloads. It wins 7 of 11 head-to-head tests, including the largest margins in integer math, data compression, and random string sorting. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration, dual-channel memory, and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial foundation for parallel tasks. The 91st percentile ranking versus the 72nd percentile for Intel confirms its overall position.

The Intel Core 7 360 is the better choice for single-threaded tasks and low-power operation. It leads in single-thread performance by 5.7% and in prime number finding by 40.8%. Its 15 W TDP is lower than the AMD part's 28 W, which matters for battery-constrained or thermally limited designs. The Intel part also uses a smaller 3 nm process, which likely contributes to its efficiency profile.

For users prioritizing encryption, compression, floating point math, or any workload that scales with cores, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 delivers consistently higher scores. For users who need maximum single-core responsiveness or minimal power draw, the Intel Core 7 360 offers a measurable advantage in those specific tests.

The physics test is effectively a tie, with only a 0.2% difference, so it does not meaningfully separate the two. The AMD part's ECC memory support and larger PCIe lane count (16 versus 6) make it more suitable for reliability-sensitive or expansion-heavy platforms. The Intel part's single-channel memory and lack of ECC limit its appeal in those scenarios, despite its single-thread strengths. Benchmark data supports this split: AMD for throughput, Intel for efficiency and single-thread speed.