AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Core 3 100HL Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and Intel Core 3 100HL are two embedded processors aimed at different segments, with the AMD part targeting mobile devices and the Intel part aimed at desktop systems. The recorded database shows a clear split in their capabilities, driven by architecture, cache, and connectivity differences. The Intel Core 3 100HL has a full benchmark profile, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no recorded benchmark scores, meaning all performance comparisons rely on the Intel part’s data and the architectural specifications listed in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors, and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has zero benchmark scores. The Intel Core 3 100HL, however, has an extensive benchmark suite. Its Cinebench results show a multicore score of 14948 in Cinebench R23, a single-core score of 2110 in the same test, and Cinebench R20 scores of 6278 for multicore and 886 for single-core. In Cinebench R15, the Intel part records 1506 multicore and 212 single-core. These numbers indicate a processor that handles multi-threaded workloads substantially better than single-threaded tasks, a pattern consistent with its 8-core, 12-thread configuration.

PassMark tests for the Intel Core 3 100HL reveal its strengths in integer and floating-point operations. It scores 56308 in integer math, 42108 in floating-point math, and 12463 in extended instructions. Data compression yields a score of 202225, while data encryption scores 11964. Random string sorting produces 23223, and finding prime numbers results in a low score of 48, suggesting that specific integer-heavy workloads may be less efficient. The PassMark multithread score is 17586, with a single-thread score of 3735. Physics testing records 928. These figures place the Intel part at the 76th percentile across all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 23545.

Since the AMD processor has no benchmark data, its performance cannot be directly quantified. The database’s nearest rivals for the Intel Core 3 100HL provide context: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U scores 23709 on average, which is 0.7% lower than the Intel part, and the Intel Core i5-11500 scores 23718, also 0.7% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V scores 23297, 1.1% higher than the Core 3 100HL, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H scores 23277, 1.2% higher. These deltas show the Intel Core 3 100HL sits in a narrow performance band, roughly within 1% of several competing mobile and desktop processors.

FAQ

Q: Why does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i have no benchmark scores in the database?

A: The database lists zero benchmarks for the AMD part, with an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile of 50. No head-to-head results exist between the two processors, so all performance analysis for the AMD side is based on its specifications alone.

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 100HL compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database shows the Intel part has an average score of 23545. It trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V by 1.1% and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H by 1.2%, while leading the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U and Intel Core i5-11500 by 0.7% each.

Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two processors based on available data?

A: The only measurable gap is architectural: the Intel part has a 12 MB shared L3 cache versus 8 MB on the AMD part, and a 2 MB per-core L2 cache versus 1 MB per-core on the AMD side. The AMD part has a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz on Intel, but no benchmark confirms the real-world impact.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 3 100HL does not. This is a key reliability feature for embedded workloads.

Q: What are the PCIe lane counts for each processor?

A: The AMD part provides 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). This affects expansion capability for embedded systems.

Q: How do the integrated graphics differ?

A: The AMD part uses a Radeon 880M, while the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. No benchmark scores exist for either GPU in the database, so performance comparisons are not possible.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Intel Core 3 100HL is a fully measured processor with a clear performance profile: it sits at the 76th percentile globally, and its nearest rivals are all within a 1.2% performance delta. For users needing verified benchmark results, the Intel part is the only option with recorded scores. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i, by contrast, has no benchmark data, making it impossible to assess its real-world performance from the database. Its specifications, however, suggest a different design philosophy: a higher boost clock (5.00 GHz vs. 4.60 GHz), a smaller L3 cache (8 MB vs. 12 MB), and a lower TDP (28 W vs. 45 W). The Intel part targets desktop embedded systems with a larger cache and more PCIe lanes at a higher power envelope, while the AMD part targets mobile embedded systems with ECC support and a dual-channel memory bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The database’s percentile for the AMD part is 50, which is the median, but that value is based on no actual scores, so it carries no comparative weight. The Intel part’s 76th percentile is substantive, anchored by 17 benchmark entries.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key fields. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 100HL has 8 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for AMD and 2.10 GHz for Intel, but boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. TDP ratings are 28 W for AMD and 45 W for Intel. Sockets differ: AMD uses Socket FP8, Intel uses Socket 1700. The AMD part is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 10 nm process by Intel. The AMD die size is 233 mm², while Intel’s is not recorded. Cache configurations differ: L1 is 80 KB per core for both, but L2 is 1 MB per core for AMD and 2 MB per core for Intel, and L3 is 8 MB for AMD versus 12 MB shared for Intel. Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD, with no value recorded for Intel. ECC memory is supported by AMD, not by Intel. PCIe lanes: AMD has 16 Gen 4 lanes, Intel has 8 Gen 4 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: Radeon 880M for AMD, Iris Xe Graphics 48EU for Intel. Market segments are Mobile for AMD and Desktop for Intel. Release dates are 2026-03-08 for AMD and 2024-04-07 for Intel. Production status is Active for both.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses the Gorgon Point codename with a Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 3 100HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The AMD part integrates a Radeon 880M GPU, while Intel integrates Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. The AMD part has a dual-channel memory bus with a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, whereas Intel’s bandwidth is not recorded. The AMD part supports ECC memory, a feature absent on Intel. The cache hierarchy differs: AMD allocates 1 MB L2 per core and 8 MB L3, while Intel allocates 2 MB L2 per core and 12 MB shared L3. The AMD part has 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, Intel has 8. The AMD part is designed for mobile embedded use with a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part is a desktop embedded processor with a 45 W TDP. The AMD part’s generation explicitly lists Zen 5 and Zen 5c, indicating a hybrid core design, while Intel’s Raptor Lake architecture typically uses performance and efficiency cores, but the database does not specify core types for Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 100HL wins in cache capacity, with 12 MB shared L3 and 2 MB per-core L2, which supports its higher multicore benchmark scores. Its 8 cores and 12 threads, while fewer than AMD’s 16 threads, still produce strong results in Cinebench R23 multicore (14948) and PassMark multithread (17586). The Intel part also benefits from a higher base clock (2.10 GHz) and a 76th percentile ranking, making it the only processor with measured performance data.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i wins in thread count (16 vs. 12), boost clock (5.00 GHz vs. 4.60 GHz), memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s vs. no recorded value), ECC support, PCIe lane count (16 vs. 8), and a lower TDP (28 W vs. 45 W). Its 4 nm process node is smaller than Intel’s 10 nm, which typically indicates better power efficiency, though no benchmarks confirm this. The AMD part’s support for LPDDR5X memory and its mobile segment designation suggest it is optimized for low-power, portable embedded systems, whereas the Intel part’s desktop segment and higher TDP indicate a focus on stationary, performance-oriented tasks. The Intel part’s benchmark wins are all in compute-heavy tests, while the AMD part’s advantages are purely specification-based, with no data to validate its real-world performance.