AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core i9-13900F Comparison

The Intel Core i9-13900F and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 represent two radically different approaches to processing power, one a desktop behemoth and the other a mobile embedded part. The benchmark data reveals a stark performance hierarchy, with the Intel processor winning every single head-to-head comparison. Yet, a closer look at the metrics, power envelopes, and feature sets suggests that the "winner" is highly dependent on the target application, making this less of a knockout and more of a strategic mismatch.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data from the head-to-head comparisons is unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-13900F dominates the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 across all eleven tested PassMark workloads. The margins are often staggering, not merely incremental. For instance, in the `passmark_find_prime_numbers` test, the Intel chip scores 204 against the AMD's 71, representing a massive 187.3% delta in favor of Intel. This is not a close contest; it is a categorical victory in raw computational throughput.

Looking at more general workloads, the `passmark_multithread` score tells a similar story. The Intel processor's 49693 score is 91.9% higher than the AMD's 25889. This is a near-doubling of performance in a test that simulates heavy, multi-threaded parallelism. The gap persists in `passmark_integer_math`, where Intel's 188022 outpaces AMD's 87940 by 113.8%. Even in `passmark_floating_point_math`, a workload where AMD's Zen architecture has historically been competitive, Intel holds a 134.8% advantage with a score of 131007 versus 55799.

The only area where the AMD chip manages to stay within striking distance is in single-threaded performance. In the `passmark_single_thread` test, Intel scores 4406, which is just 9.4% ahead of AMD's 4029. This is a significant finding. While the Intel chip is far ahead in multi-threaded and complex instruction tests, its single-core lead is much more modest. This suggests that for lightly-threaded tasks, the performance gap narrows considerably, proof of the efficiency of AMD's Zen 5 architecture in the P164.

Other tests reinforce the pattern of Intel dominance. In `passmark_data_compression`, Intel's 635147 is 93.7% higher than AMD's 327891. The `passmark_data_encryption` test shows a 138% advantage for Intel (38214 vs 16055). Even in `passmark_extended_instructions`, which tests AVX and similar instruction sets, Intel leads by 51% (36525 vs 24193). The `passmark_physics` score is also lopsided, with Intel at 2766 and AMD at 1210, a 128.6% difference. The `passmark_random_string_sorting` test shows a 102.4% advantage for Intel.

The Verdict

If the sole criterion is raw benchmark performance, the verdict is unequivocal: the Intel Core i9-13900F is the superior processor. With a win count of 11 to 0, the data shows it is faster in every measurable workload, often by more than double. The Intel chip also has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 51730 compared to the AMD's 52901? Wait, this is incorrect. The FACT PACK shows the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has an `avgBenchmarkScore` of 52901, which is higher than the Intel's 51730.

This is a critical paradox. Despite losing every head-to-head test, the AMD processor has a higher average benchmark score. This is because its `avgBenchmarkScore` is calculated from a different, broader set of benchmarks than the head-to-head comparison. Looking at its nearest rivals, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, just like the Intel. Its closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F, with a deltaPct of 0.1%. The Intel's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X, with a deltaPct of -0.4%. This means that while the Intel i9-13900F is a dominant force in the head-to-head, the AMD P164 is a highly competitive processor in its own right, trading blows with desktop-class CPUs on the average benchmark scale.

This data implies the P164 is not a weak processor; it is simply outclassed by the i9-13900F in absolute terms. The i9-13900F is a top-tier desktop part. The P164 is an embedded mobile part designed for a different purpose. The verdict for a desktop user seeking maximum performance is clear: choose the Intel. However, for a system designer looking for a high-performing, low-power embedded processor, the AMD P164's data suggests it is a formidable option, despite losing this specific comparison.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the data, the Intel Core i9-13900F wins in every single benchmark category where the two are directly compared. There is no workload in the head-to-head list where the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 comes out ahead. Therefore, from a pure performance perspective, the Intel chip is the winner for any task that relies on these specific PassMark tests. This includes data compression, encryption, integer math, floating-point math, physics simulations, and multi-threaded rendering.

However, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164's field of victory lies outside the benchmark scores. Its key advantages are its power consumption and feature set. With a TDP of only 28 watts compared to the Intel's 65 watts, the AMD chip is designed for environments where heat and power draw are critical constraints. It also features an integrated Radeon 880M GPU, whereas the Intel i9-13900F has no integrated graphics. This makes the AMD part a "system-on-a-chip" solution, potentially eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in embedded or mobile applications. In this context, the AMD P164 "wins" by being the more appropriate and efficient solution for a compact, power-conscious design, even if it loses on raw speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900F is significantly faster. It scores 49693 in the `passmark_multithread` test, which is 91.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164's score of 25889. The Intel chip also has a 24-core, 32-thread configuration versus the AMD's 8-core, 16-thread setup.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 competitive in single-threaded tasks?

A: Yes, relatively speaking. In the `passmark_single_thread` test, the Intel Core i9-13900F scores 4406, only 9.4% higher than the AMD's 4029. This is the smallest performance gap between the two processors in any shared benchmark.

Q: What is the performance difference in data encryption?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900F leads by a wide margin. It scores 38214 in the `passmark_data_encryption` test, which is 138% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164's score of 16055.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has a higher average benchmark score of 52901, while the Intel Core i9-13900F has an average score of 51730. Despite this, the Intel chip wins every direct head-to-head comparison.

Q: Which processor has a higher power draw?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900F has a TDP of 65 watts, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164's TDP of 28 watts. This suggests the AMD chip is designed for more power-efficient systems.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 features an integrated Radeon 880M GPU. The Intel Core i9-13900F does not have integrated graphics.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Core i9-13900F is based on the Raptor Lake-S architecture, a 10nm design from Intel. It is a desktop part with 24 cores and 32 threads. In contrast, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is built on the "Gorgon Point" codename, which is part of the "Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c)" generation. It is a mobile part manufactured on a 4nm process by TSMC, with 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD chip's process node is more advanced, which contributes to its lower 28-watt TDP. The Intel processor has a larger die size at 257 mm² compared to the AMD's 233 mm², but the AMD's denser process allows it to pack a similar amount of complexity into a smaller physical footprint.

The cache hierarchies are also distinct. The Intel i9-13900F has a large 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD P164 has a smaller 8 MB of L3 cache. However, the AMD part has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Intel has 2 MB per core. This difference in cache allocation reflects their different design goals: Intel's larger L3 is beneficial for multi-threaded workloads that share data, while AMD's approach may favor per-core performance. The AMD chip also has a listed memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel part.

Specification Differences

The most significant specification differences between the two processors highlight their contrasting purposes. The Intel Core i9-13900F is a desktop processor with a TDP of 65 watts, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is a mobile part with a TDP of just 28 watts. The Intel chip has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, which is higher than the AMD's 5.00 GHz. Both have a base clock of 2.00 GHz.

The memory support differs, with Intel supporting both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The PCIe support is also different: the Intel offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Intel part uses an Intel Socket 1700, whereas the AMD uses an AMD Socket FP8. The Intel i9-13900F has a launch MSRP of $524, while no launch MSRP is provided for the AMD P164. The AMD part is the only one with an integrated GPU, the Radeon 880M, and also has a specified memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.