AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Core i9-14900 Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-14900 wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. Out of 11 direct comparisons, it takes 11 victories. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 does not record a single win. The Intel part also holds a higher overall standing, with a 92nd percentile rank across all CPUs versus the AMD part's 91st percentile. Its average benchmark score of 58115 is roughly 10% higher than the AMD's 52901.

The Intel Core i9-14900 is the clear performance pick for desktop workloads that can use its 24 cores and 32 threads. Its lead is largest in multi-threaded and math-heavy tasks, often by margins of 40% to 60%. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164, by contrast, is built for a different role. It is a mobile-class processor on AMD Socket FP8 with a 28 TDP, a 4 nm process node, and integrated Radeon 880M graphics. The data shows it is competitive only in the single-thread metric, where it trails by a modest 6.8%, but it falls far behind everywhere else.

The verdict from the benchmark results is simple: for raw CPU performance, the Intel Core i9-14900 is the superior product. The AMD part's advantages lie in its embedded mobile positioning, lower TDP, and different platform features, not in benchmark scores.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 has an average benchmark score of 58115, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 scores 52901.

Q: How large is the Intel part's lead in multi-threaded performance?

A: In the passmark_multithread test, the Intel Core i9-14900 scores 44578 versus the AMD's 25889, a 41.9% difference.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 competitive in any benchmark?

A: Its closest result is in the passmark_single_thread test, where it scores 4029 against the Intel's 4323, a 6.8% gap. It loses all other recorded comparisons by over 20%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i9-14900 has 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core i9-14900 uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core i9-14900?

A: The launch MSRP is $549. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 belongs to the Gorgon Point generation, using a mix of 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 i9-14900 is a Raptor Lake-R part, part of the Core 14th Gen series, built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a 257 mm² die.

Cache hierarchies differ sharply. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part also has 80 KB of L1 per core, but doubles L2 to 2 MB per core and offers a much larger 36 MB of shared L3 cache. That extra cache is a major factor in the Intel part's benchmark dominance, especially in workloads that benefit from large data sets residing close to the cores.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also on a dual-channel bus, but no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, offering double the data transfer rate per lane for compatible devices.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 carries a Radeon 880M, while the Intel Core i9-14900 uses UHD Graphics 770. The database does not record graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible from the data.

The production status for both is active. The AMD part was released in 2026, the Intel part in 2024. The AMD part is a mobile-segment chip, while the Intel part is a desktop-segment chip. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show a clear split between the two parts. Core count: the AMD has 8 cores, the Intel has 24. Thread count: 16 versus 32. Base clocks are identical at 2.00 GHz, but boost clocks differ, with the AMD reaching 5.00 GHz and the Intel reaching 5.80 GHz.

TDP is a significant differentiator. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has a 28 TDP, while the Intel Core i9-14900 has a 65 TDP. That is more than double the thermal envelope for the Intel part, which explains part of its performance advantage.

Sockets are different: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700. The process node differs, 4 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. Die size differs, 233 mm² versus 257 mm². L2 cache per core is 1 MB for AMD and 2 MB for Intel. L3 cache is 8 MB for AMD and 36 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support: AMD lists DDR5 and LPDDR5X; Intel lists DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for AMD at 89.6 GB/s. PCIe generation differs: Gen 4 for AMD, Gen 5 for Intel, both with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics: Radeon 880M for AMD, UHD Graphics 770 for Intel.

Market segment: mobile for AMD, desktop for Intel. The Intel part has a recorded part number of SRN3V and a launch MSRP of $549. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part also has a recorded series name, Core 14th Gen, while the AMD part has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is one-sided. The Intel Core i9-14900 wins all 11 recorded comparisons. The largest margin comes in the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where the Intel scores 188 against the AMD's 71, a 62.2% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to core count and clock speed, both of which favor the Intel part.

The passmark_data_encryption test shows a 52.1% lead for Intel, with scores of 33540 versus 16055. The passmark_floating_point_math test follows closely, with Intel leading 120262 to 55799, a 53.6% margin. Integer math is similarly lopsided: Intel scores 175010, AMD scores 87940, a 49.8% difference. These math-heavy workloads demonstrate the Intel part's advantage in raw compute throughput.

The passmark_physics test shows Intel at 2486 versus AMD at 1210, a 51.3% lead. The passmark_data_compression test has Intel at 550271 and AMD at 327891, a 40.4% gap. Random string sorting goes to Intel at 61060 versus 34801, a 43% margin. Extended instructions favor Intel at 30624 versus 24193, a 21% gap, the second-smallest margin after single-thread.

Multi-threaded performance, measured by passmark_multithread, shows Intel at 44578 and AMD at 25889, a 41.9% lead. The single-thread tests are the closest. Both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread record identical scores: Intel at 4323, AMD at 4029, a 6.8% margin. This indicates the AMD's Zen 5 cores are competitive on a per-thread basis, but the Intel part's higher boost clock of 5.80 GHz and larger cache help it edge ahead.

The Intel part also holds a higher average benchmark score of 58115 versus 52901, and a higher percentile rank of 92 versus 91. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M with a score of 58323 and a delta of -0.4%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D at 58386 with a delta of -0.5%. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F at 52873 with a delta of 0.1%, and the Intel Xeon 634 at 52974 with a delta of -0.1%.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900 wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its biggest advantages are in multi-threaded, math-intensive, and data-processing workloads. For tasks like prime number finding, data encryption, floating point math, and integer math, it leads by roughly 50% to 62%. These are the kinds of workloads that scale with core count, thread count, and large shared cache, all of which favor the Intel part's 24 cores, 32 threads, and 36 MB L3 cache.

The Intel part also wins in data compression and random string sorting by margins of 40% to 43%, suggesting strong memory subsystem performance and cache efficiency. Physics simulation shows a 51.3% lead, indicating advantages in deterministic compute. Extended instructions, which cover SIMD-style workloads, show a 21% lead, a more moderate but still decisive margin.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has no recorded wins. However, its closest margin is in single-thread performance, where it trails by only 6.8%. This suggests that for lightly threaded applications, the AMD part is nearly competitive. Its 4 nm process, 8 MB L3 cache, and 5.00 GHz boost clock allow it to approach the Intel part's per-core speed, though it does not surpass it.

The AMD part's practical strengths lie outside the benchmark data. It is a mobile-segment processor with a 28 TDP, compared to the Intel's 65 TDP. It uses a smaller 4 nm process, which typically indicates better power efficiency per transistor. It supports LPDDR5X memory, which is common in mobile platforms. It also has a Radeon 880M integrated GPU, which may handle graphics workloads more capable than the Intel UHD Graphics 770, though the database records no graphics benchmarks to confirm this.

For desktop users seeking maximum CPU throughput, the Intel Core i9-14900 is the only choice based on the recorded data. For embedded or mobile applications where power draw and platform size matter more than raw benchmark scores, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 offers a lower TDP, a mobile socket, and a smaller process node. The benchmark results, however, consistently favor Intel in every measured metric.