AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core i5-14400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded dataset shows a clear split between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 and the Intel Core i5-14400, with the AMD part claiming 7 of 11 head-to-head wins. The largest margin in either direction belongs to AMD in extended instructions, where the P164 scores 24193 against Intel's 19816, a 22.1% advantage. This is the most decisive result in the comparison and indicates a substantial lead in workloads that leverage advanced instruction sets.

Single-thread performance also favors AMD, with the P164 posting 4029 versus 3741 for the i5-14400, a 7.7% difference. The same margin appears in the duplicate singlethread entry, confirming consistency. Integer math follows the same pattern: AMD scores 87940, Intel 82017, giving the P164 a 7.2% edge. Random string sorting goes to AMD as well, 34801 against 32346, a 7.6% difference. Data compression is closer, with AMD at 327891 and Intel at 314995, a 4.1% lead. The multithread score rounds out AMD's wins at 25889 versus 25080, a 3.2% margin.

Intel's victories are fewer but not trivial. The physics test shows the largest Intel advantage: 1396 versus 1210, a 13.3% difference. Floating point math goes to Intel at 61549 against 55799, a 9.3% edge. Data encryption favors Intel modestly, 16731 versus 16055, a 4% difference. Prime number finding is the narrowest Intel win in percentage terms, 80 versus 71, an 11.2% gap that is still the second-largest margin in the entire comparison.

The average benchmark scores place these parts in different tiers. The AMD P164 has an average score of 52901, while the i5-14400 averages 32115. This is a substantial overall gap, but the head-to-head results show that the i5-14400 remains competitive in specific computational tasks. The AMD part's percentile ranking is 91 against all CPUs, while Intel sits at 82, meaning the P164 outperforms a larger fraction of the recorded database population.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 delivers higher overall throughput, wins 7 of 11 direct comparisons, and holds a 64.7% advantage in average benchmark score (52901 versus 32115). Its single-thread lead of 7.7% and extended instructions lead of 22.1% make it the stronger choice for workloads that depend on per-core efficiency and modern instruction support.

The Intel Core i5-14400 retains advantages in physics simulation, floating point math, encryption, and prime number finding. The physics margin of 13.3% is the single largest head-to-head delta in the dataset, so applications that stress physics calculations will see a meaningful benefit from the Intel part. However, these wins are concentrated in narrower domains, and the overall multithread score still favors AMD by 3.2%.

The database shows the P164 sitting among rivals with average scores of 52873 (AMD Ryzen 5 9500F), 52974 (Intel Xeon 634), 53206 (AMD EPYC 7313P), and 53288 (AMD Ryzen 9 7900X), with deltas of 0.1%, -0.1%, -0.6%, and -0.7% respectively. The i5-14400, by contrast, sits near Intel Core i7-12800H (32121, 0% delta), Intel Core i7-13705H (32076, 0.1%), Intel Core i5-14450HX (32040, 0.2%), and Intel Core i9-11900 (32226, -0.3%). These nearest-rival clusters confirm that the P164 competes in a higher performance bracket, while the i5-14400 anchors a more modest tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge at the foundation level. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core i5-14400 uses Intel's 10 nm node. The AMD codename is Gorgon Point, belonging to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel's part is Raptor Lake-R, from the Core 14th Gen family built on Raptor Lake architecture.

Core counts differ: AMD provides 8 cores and 16 threads, Intel provides 10 cores and 16 threads. Both parts expose the same thread count, but Intel distributes it across more physical cores. Clock speeds favor AMD in boost behavior, with a 5.00 GHz maximum versus Intel's 4.70 GHz. Base clocks favor Intel, 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz. Thermal design power differs substantially: the AMD part is rated at 28 W, while Intel lists 65 W. This indicates the AMD processor is engineered for lower-power environments.

Cache hierarchies show structural differences. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core. AMD uses 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel uses 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache diverges sharply: AMD has 8 MB, while Intel has 20 MB shared. This larger Intel L3 could explain its advantage in certain memory-sensitive workloads, though the benchmark data does not show a consistent Intel edge in cache-dependent tests.

Memory support varies. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel access and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe generation on Intel offers higher potential transfer rates for peripherals.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD includes Radeon 880M, while Intel includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, indicating a mobile-oriented design, while Intel uses Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The production status for both is Active. Release dates differ: the AMD part is dated March 2026, while Intel's is January 2024. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $221; the AMD part has no launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins 7 of 11 comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-14400 wins 4.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between these two CPUs?

A: The extended instructions test shows the biggest gap, with AMD scoring 24193 versus Intel's 19816, a 22.1% difference.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has an average score of 52901, while the Intel Core i5-14400 averages 32115.

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400 has 10 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The AMD part is rated at 28 W, and the Intel part is rated at 65 W.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Core i5-14400 has 20 MB shared L3 cache.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the choice for workloads dominated by single-thread responsiveness, integer arithmetic, and modern instruction sets. The 7.7% single-thread lead and 22.1% extended instructions advantage make it suited for applications that compile code, process structured data, or rely on vectorized operations. Its multithread score of 25889 versus 25080 shows it also holds a slight edge in parallel throughput, despite having fewer physical cores. Data compression at 327891 versus 314995 and random string sorting at 34801 versus 32346 reinforce this pattern: the AMD part handles data transformation tasks more efficiently.

The Intel Core i5-14400 is the better fit for physics-heavy simulation, floating point calculations, and encryption workloads. The physics score of 1396 versus 1210 represents a 13.3% advantage, the largest Intel win in the dataset. Floating point math at 61549 versus 55799 gives Intel a 9.3% edge, useful for scientific computing and numerical analysis. Data encryption at 16731 versus 16055, a 4% lead, and prime number finding at 80 versus 71, an 11.2% lead, indicate that Intel retains strength in mathematical and security-oriented tasks. The larger 20 MB L3 cache may contribute to these outcomes, though the recorded data does not isolate cache effects directly.

The overall percentile rankings place the AMD part higher, at 91 versus 82, meaning it outperforms a greater share of all CPUs in the database. The nearest-rival data confirms the positioning: the P164 trades blows with processors like the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F (0.1% delta) and Intel Xeon 634 (-0.1% delta), while the i5-14400 sits alongside mobile and desktop parts like the Intel Core i7-12800H (0% delta) and Intel Core i9-11900 (-0.3% delta). For applications that prioritize broad throughput and single-core efficiency, the AMD data is compelling. For narrowly defined physics, floating point, and encryption tasks, the Intel part delivers measurable wins.