AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Processor 300 Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 vs Intel Processor 300

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is a mobile processor with 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 is a desktop chip with 2 cores and 4 threads. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, whereas Intel relies on a 10 nm node from its own fabs. The Ryzen AI Embedded P164 posts an average benchmark score of 52,901, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Processor 300 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database and sits in the 50th percentile. The AMD chip also carries a 28 W thermal design power, while the Intel part draws 46 W.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What are the clock speeds of these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Processor 300 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz, and no boost clock is recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 records an average benchmark score of 52,901. The Intel Processor 300 has an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no benchmark data is available for it in the database.

Q: What is the thermal design power for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has a thermal design power of 28 W. The Intel Processor 300 has a thermal design power of 46 W.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor 300 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What integrated graphics do these processors use?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses Radeon 880M graphics. The Intel Processor 300 uses UHD Graphics 710.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins decisively in core count, thread count, and overall compute capacity. With 8 cores and 16 threads, it offers four times the core count of the Intel Processor 300. This translates directly into superior multi-threaded performance, which is reflected in its benchmark results. The AMD chip achieves a PassMark multi-thread score of 25,889, a PassMark integer math score of 87,940, and a PassMark floating point math score of 55,799. These numbers indicate strong throughput for parallel workloads, such as data compression, encryption, and scientific calculations. The AMD part also records a PassMark data compression score of 327,891 and a PassMark data encryption score of 16,055, suggesting robust performance in data-intensive tasks.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 also wins in clock speed headroom. Its boost clock of 5.00 GHz exceeds the Intel Processor 300's base clock of 3.90 GHz, and the Intel part has no recorded boost clock. This higher peak frequency helps the AMD chip achieve a PassMark single-thread score of 4,029, which indicates strong performance in lightly threaded applications. The AMD processor also has a larger L3 cache, 8 MB versus 6 MB on the Intel chip, and a similar L1 cache of 80 KB per core. The AMD part supports faster memory types, DDR5 and LPDDR5X, and has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel Processor 300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 but has no memory bandwidth figure in the database.

The Intel Processor 300 wins in a few specific areas, primarily related to its desktop positioning and simplicity. It uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, which is common in desktop systems, and it has a higher base clock of 3.90 GHz compared to the AMD chip's 2.00 GHz. This means the Intel part starts at a higher frequency, which can benefit short, single-threaded bursts. The Intel Processor 300 also has a larger L2 cache per core, 1.25 MB versus 1 MB on the AMD part, which may help with certain cache-sensitive workloads. Its PCIe support is Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the AMD chip uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, giving the Intel part a newer interface standard. The Intel Processor 300 also has a smaller die size, 163 mm² versus 233 mm² for the AMD chip, which indicates a simpler physical design.

The Intel Processor 300 has a recorded launch MSRP of $82, but pricing is not analyzed in this report. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 does not have a listed launch price in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. This architecture is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, and the die measures 233 mm². The chip combines high-performance Zen 5 cores with efficiency-oriented Zen 5c cores, though the database does not specify the exact mix. The Intel Processor 300 uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-S, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, with a die size of 163 mm². This is a desktop-oriented design with a simpler core layout.

The cache hierarchies differ between the two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's larger L3 cache provides more shared storage for frequently accessed data, while the Intel part's larger per-core L2 cache may benefit single-threaded access patterns. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel Processor 300, which is relevant for embedded and reliability-focused applications.

Memory support diverges significantly. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, with a dual-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Processor 300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, also with a dual-channel bus, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. This means the AMD part is designed for newer, faster memory technologies, particularly low-power LPDDR5X, which suits its mobile embedded positioning. The Intel part retains DDR4 compatibility, which can be an advantage in cost-sensitive desktop builds, but the database does not provide performance numbers for either memory configuration.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel Processor 300 uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel part's newer PCIe standard offers higher bandwidth per lane, but the AMD part's Gen 4 implementation is still sufficient for many embedded and mobile workloads. The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD chip uses Radeon 880M, which is a more capable GPU solution, while the Intel chip uses UHD Graphics 710, which is a basic integrated graphics unit.

The market segment and socket types reflect their intended use cases. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is a mobile processor using AMD Socket FP8, designed for embedded systems and laptops. The Intel Processor 300 is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1700, aimed at standard desktop builds. The release dates also differ, with the AMD part released in March 2026 and the Intel part released in January 2024. Both processors have locked multipliers, and both are listed as active in production. The Intel part has a part number of SRN3J, while the AMD part's part number is listed as unknown.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts represent the largest specification gap. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads. This is a 4x difference in core count and a 4x difference in thread count. The base clocks differ, with the AMD chip running at 2.00 GHz and the Intel chip at 3.90 GHz. The AMD chip has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel chip has no recorded boost clock. The thermal design power also differs: 28 W for the AMD part versus 46 W for the Intel part, meaning the AMD chip is designed for lower power consumption despite having more cores.

The process nodes are different: 4 nm for the AMD chip versus 10 nm for the Intel chip. The foundries also differ, with TSMC producing the AMD chip and Intel producing its own chip. The die sizes are 233 mm² for the AMD chip and 163 mm² for the Intel chip. The cache configuration varies, with the AMD chip having 1 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of L3, while the Intel chip has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 6 MB of L3. The L1 cache is the same at 80 KB per core.

Memory support shows a split: the AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD chip has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel chip has no bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on the AMD chip but not on the Intel chip. The PCIe interface differs, with Gen 4 on the AMD chip and Gen 5 on the Intel chip, both with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics are Radeon 880M on the AMD chip and UHD Graphics 710 on the Intel chip. The market segments are mobile for AMD and desktop for Intel. The sockets are AMD Socket FP8 and Intel Socket 1700, respectively. The release dates are March 2026 for AMD and January 2024 for Intel. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $82, while the AMD chip has no launch price listed. The Intel chip has a part number of SRN3J, while the AMD chip's part number is unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164, but no benchmark results for the Intel Processor 300. This means the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on the AMD chip's recorded scores and the Intel chip's absence of data. The AMD processor's percentile ranking of 91 indicates that it outperforms 91 percent of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel processor's percentile ranking of 50 places it in the middle of the distribution, though this ranking is not backed by any recorded benchmark scores.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 shows strong performance across a range of PassMark tests. Its single-thread score is 4,029, which indicates solid performance in single-threaded applications, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools. Its multi-thread score is 25,889, which is roughly six times the single-thread score, reflecting the scaling provided by 8 cores and 16 threads. The integer math score is 87,940, and the floating point math score is 55,799, both indicating strong compute throughput for numerical workloads. The extended instructions score is 24,193, which suggests good performance in workloads that use SIMD or specialized instruction sets.

The AMD chip also performs well in memory and data-oriented tasks. Its data compression score is 327,891, which is a high figure and indicates efficient handling of compression algorithms. Its data encryption score is 16,055, which is lower but still represents capable encryption performance. The random string sorting score is 34,801, and the find prime numbers score is 71, which is a measure of integer-heavy algorithmic work. The physics score is 1,210, which is a lower number and reflects the workload's sensitivity to core clock and cache behavior.

The nearest rivals for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 provide context for its average score of 52,901. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F has an average score of 52,873, which is 0.1 percent lower. The Intel Xeon 634 has an average score of 52,974, which is 0.1 percent higher. The AMD EPYC 7313P has an average score of 53,206, which is 0.6 percent higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X has an average score of 53,288, which is 0.7 percent higher. These deltas are small, indicating that the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 performs within a narrow band of these established processors. The Intel Processor 300 has no rival data and no average score, so it cannot be placed in the same comparison.

The absence of benchmark data for the Intel Processor 300 is a significant factor in this analysis. Without recorded scores, the database cannot quantify its performance relative to the AMD chip or any other processor. The Intel part's 50th percentile ranking suggests it sits near the middle of the performance distribution, but this is not substantiated by any measurements. The AMD chip's 91st percentile ranking, by contrast, is directly supported by its recorded scores and its proximity to higher-performing rivals.

The performance gap between the two chips is likely substantial given the core and thread differences, but the database does not provide a direct head-to-head benchmark result. The AMD chip's multi-thread score of 25,889 and its average score of 52,901 indicate a processor that can handle demanding parallel workloads. The Intel Processor 300, with 2 cores and 4 threads, would logically fall well behind in multi-threaded tasks, but no recorded data confirms this. The AMD chip's boost clock of 5.00 GHz also gives it an advantage in single-threaded performance, as reflected in its single-thread score of 4,029, though the Intel chip's higher base clock of 3.90 GHz may narrow that gap in short bursts.

In summary, the recorded data shows that the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is a high-performing mobile processor with a strong benchmark profile, while the Intel Processor 300 lacks any recorded benchmarks, leaving its performance unquantified in the database.