AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core i5-14450HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between these two mobile processors, with the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 taking 8 of the 11 head-to-head benchmark wins. The most decisive margin comes in extended instructions, where AMD leads by 40.6% (24193 versus 17207), a substantial advantage for workloads using AVX or similar instruction sets. The Intel Core i5-14450HX wins the remaining three tests, with its largest win in prime number finding, where it scores 98 against AMD's 71, a 27.6% difference.

In single-threaded performance, the AMD part is ahead by 10.6%, scoring 4029 versus 3643 on the PassMark single thread test. This is a meaningful lead for lightly threaded applications. The same margin appears on the duplicate singlethread entry, confirming consistency. Data compression also favors AMD by 17.7% (327891 versus 278538), and random string sorting shows the identical 17.7% gap, with AMD at 34801 and Intel at 29565. Integer math is another AMD win, 87940 versus 78330, a 12.3% advantage.

The Intel chip counters in floating point math, scoring 58037 versus 55799, a 3.9% lead. It also wins the physics test by 18% (1475 versus 1210), which is notable for simulation or physics-based workloads. Prime number generation gives Intel its third win, as already noted. Multithread performance goes to AMD by 9.3% (25889 versus 23680), and data encryption shows a narrower AMD win of 3.1% (16055 versus 15574).

Looking at the broader context, the AMD part sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel part is at the 82nd percentile. The average benchmark score for AMD is 52901, compared to Intel's 32040. This is a large gap in aggregate performance, driven mostly by AMD's wins in the PassMark suite, which favors its architecture. The nearest rivals for AMD include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X at 53288 (0.7% higher) and the AMD EPYC 7313P at 53206 (0.6% higher), showing the P164 is competitive with desktop-class parts. Intel's nearest rivals are all within 0.6% of its 32040 average, including the Intel Core i7-13705H at 32076 and the i5-14400 at 32115.

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct use cases. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the stronger overall processor for mixed workloads, especially those involving encryption, compression, integer math, and extended instructions. Its 40.6% lead in extended instructions makes it the pick for compute-heavy tasks like scientific simulations or media encoding that use AVX-512 or similar. The 17.7% wins in data compression and random string sorting suggest strong memory subsystem performance, which helps database and archival workloads.

The Intel Core i5-14450HX is the better choice for physics-based simulations and prime number searching, where it leads by 18% and 27.6% respectively. Its floating point math advantage of 3.9% also makes it slightly better for pure FPU tasks. However, the Intel part's overall average score is 39.4% lower than AMD's (32040 versus 52901), and it trails in single-thread performance by 10.6%, which affects responsiveness in everyday applications. For a builder prioritizing raw compute breadth, the AMD part is the data-supported pick. For niche workloads that heavily use floating point or prime number generation, the Intel chip has a clear, if narrow, edge.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 4029 on the PassMark single thread test, which is 10.6% higher than the Intel Core i5-14450HX's 3643.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multithreaded workloads?

A: AMD wins the multithread test with a score of 25889 versus Intel's 23680, a 9.3% advantage.

Q: Which processor is better for data encryption?

A: AMD leads in data encryption by 3.1%, scoring 16055 compared to Intel's 15574.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark by a large margin?

A: Yes, Intel wins the prime number finding test by 27.6% (98 versus 71) and the physics test by 18% (1475 versus 1210).

Q: What is the overall percentile ranking for each CPU?

A: The AMD part ranks at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel part ranks at the 82nd percentile.

Q: How close are the average benchmark scores?

A: AMD's average score is 52901, while Intel's is 32040. Intel's nearest rival, the Core i7-13705H, scores 32076, within 0.1% of Intel's average.

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 i5-14450HX has 10 cores and also 16 threads. Base clocks differ: AMD runs at 2.00 GHz, Intel at 2.40 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, with AMD at 5.00 GHz and Intel at 4.80 GHz. Thermal design power is a major difference: AMD is rated at 28W, Intel at 55W. The AMD chip uses an AMD Socket FP8, while Intel uses Intel BGA 1964. AMD's process node is 4 nm from TSMC, Intel's is 10 nm from Intel. Die size differs slightly: AMD is 233 mm², Intel is 257 mm². Cache configurations are not identical: both have 80 KB L1 per core, but AMD has 1 MB L2 per core and 8 MB L3, while Intel has 2 MB L2 per core and 20 MB shared L3. Memory support also differs: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s; Intel does not have a recorded bandwidth figure. PCIe generation differs: AMD is Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel is Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are Radeon 880M on AMD versus UHD Graphics 710 on Intel. The Intel multiplier is unlocked, AMD's is not. Intel has a part number of SRMXK; AMD's is unknown. Release dates are 2026-03-08 for AMD and 2024-01-07 for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is substantial. AMD's codename is Gorgon Point, part of the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel's codename is Raptor Lake-HX, part of the Core i5 series under the Raptor Lake-HX Refresh generation. AMD uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while Intel uses a 10 nm process from its own foundry. This process difference likely explains AMD's lower 28W TDP compared to Intel's 55W, despite similar boost clocks. Cache architecture differs in L2 and L3: AMD allocates 1 MB L2 per core and 8 MB L3 total, whereas Intel allocates 2 MB L2 per core and 20 MB shared L3. Intel's larger L3 cache may help in some workloads, but the benchmark data does not show a consistent advantage. AMD supports ECC memory, as does Intel, and both use dual-channel memory buses. AMD's integrated graphics are Radeon 880M, which is a more capable iGPU than Intel's UHD Graphics 710, though no graphics benchmarks are in the recorded data. PCIe generation favors Intel with Gen 5 versus AMD's Gen 4, but both provide 16 CPU lanes. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while AMD's is locked. AMD's release date is over two years later than Intel's, reflecting a newer design generation.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins in all but three of the 11 head-to-head tests. Its strongest areas are extended instructions (40.6% ahead), data compression and random string sorting (both 17.7% ahead), integer math (12.3% ahead), and single-thread performance (10.6% ahead). It also wins multithread by 9.3% and data encryption by 3.1%. These results point to a processor that handles general productivity, data processing, and encryption tasks with clear superiority. The 91st percentile ranking and average score of 52901 place it near desktop-class rivals like the Ryzen 9 7900X, making it a strong all-rounder for mobile workstations.

The Intel Core i5-14450HX wins only in prime number finding (27.6% ahead), physics (18% ahead), and floating point math (3.9% ahead). These are specific, compute-focused workloads. The physics win is the most practical, as it suggests better performance in simulation engines or physics-based rendering. The prime number result is more niche, but the floating point edge is relevant for scientific computing. Intel's 82nd percentile and average score of 32040 place it near mid-range laptops like the Core i7-13705H. For a user running physics simulations or FP-heavy code, the Intel chip is the data-backed choice, but for everything else in the benchmark suite, the AMD part delivers higher scores. Builders should weigh the 28W TDP of AMD against Intel's 55W TDP, as the AMD chip achieves its wins at lower power, which may matter for thermal design in compact systems.