AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Core 3 201E Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts differ between these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E uses 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD part has twice the thread count, which directly impacts multi-threaded workload performance.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz. The AMD part holds a 0.20 GHz advantage in maximum boost frequency.

Q: What is the difference in process node technology?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Core 3 201E uses a 10 nm process from Intel. The smaller process node generally contributes to lower power consumption and higher transistor density.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and the Intel Core 3 201E support ECC memory. This makes both suitable for workstation or embedded applications where data integrity is critical.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i delivers 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Intel Core 3 201E delivers 76.8 GB/s. The AMD part offers approximately 17% more bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher overall performance percentile?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E sits at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i sits at the 50th percentile. The Intel part ranks higher in overall standing despite having fewer cores.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i is designed for efficiency and multi-threaded throughput. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 28 W TDP targets power-sensitive embedded and mobile deployments. The 5.00 GHz boost clock provides strong single-thread responsiveness when needed, while the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth supports data-intensive workloads. The Radeon 880M integrated graphics deliver substantially more GPU capability than the Intel part's UHD Graphics 730, which makes the AMD processor the stronger choice for embedded visual computing, multimedia processing, or GPU-accelerated tasks where a discrete card is not available.

The Intel Core 3 201E wins on raw database percentile standing. It ranks at the 73rd percentile compared to the AMD part's 50th percentile, and its average benchmark score of 19,056 reflects that standing. The Intel part uses a 10 nm process with a 163 mm² die, runs at a 60 W TDP, and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which is a generation ahead of the AMD part's PCIe Gen 4. For desktop-oriented embedded deployments that need PCIe Gen 5 connectivity for high-speed storage or accelerators, the Intel processor is the better fit. The 12 MB shared L3 cache also provides a larger last-level cache pool than the AMD part's 8 MB.

The Intel part also wins on its benchmark record. The database contains 17 benchmark entries for the Intel Core 3 201E, including Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 results plus a full PassMark suite. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, which means all direct performance comparison must rely on the Intel part's measured results and the AMD part's architectural specifications. The Intel part's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19,047 and a 0% difference, the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19,039 with a 0.1% difference, the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18,982 with a 0.4% difference, and the AMD EPYC 7773X at 18,979 with a 0.4% difference. These narrow gaps indicate the Intel Core 3 201E performs in a tightly competitive band around the 19,000 average score mark.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i comes from the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. This hybrid core architecture combines full Zen 5 cores with denser Zen 5c cores to balance performance and efficiency within a 28 W power envelope. The processor uses a 4 nm process from TSMC and has a die size of 233 mm². The L1 cache is 80 KB per core, L2 cache is 1 MB per core, and L3 cache totals 8 MB. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a dual-channel interface, with ECC support enabled.

The Intel Core 3 201E comes from the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation. It uses a 10 nm process from Intel with a die size of 163 mm². The L1 cache is 80 KB per core, L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core, and L3 cache totals 12 MB shared across all cores. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel interface, also with ECC support. The Intel processor uses a monolithic design with four Performance cores, each capable of two threads, and no efficiency cores listed in the database.

The memory controller differences are significant. AMD supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, which allows the embedded platform to use low-power soldered memory configurations common in mobile and compact embedded designs. Intel supports DDR4 in addition to DDR5, which provides flexibility for desktop embedded boards that want to reuse existing DDR4 memory inventories. Both processors use a dual-channel memory bus, but the AMD part delivers 89.6 GB/s compared to the Intel part's 76.8 GB/s.

PCIe support also differs by generation. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core 3 201E provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel part's PCIe Gen 5 support doubles the per-lane bandwidth available for discrete GPUs, NVMe storage, or other high-throughput peripherals, assuming the rest of the platform supports it.

The integrated graphics differ substantially. AMD pairs the processor with Radeon 880M graphics, which is a high-performance integrated GPU based on RDNA architecture. Intel pairs the processor with UHD Graphics 730, which is a more basic integrated graphics solution. For embedded applications that require display output or light GPU compute without a discrete card, the AMD part has a clear architectural advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The base clock differs significantly: AMD runs at 2.00 GHz while Intel runs at 3.60 GHz. The boost clock favors AMD at 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz for Intel.

The TDP difference is substantial. The AMD part has a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part has a 60 W TDP. This means the AMD processor is designed for much lower power envelopes, which is typical for mobile and embedded deployments. The Intel part draws more than double the power budget, which is typical for desktop-oriented sockets.

The socket types differ completely. AMD uses the AMD Socket FP8, which is a mobile and embedded socket. Intel uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is a desktop-oriented socket. This means the two processors are not interchangeable in any platform.

The process node favors AMD at 4 nm from TSMC, while Intel uses 10 nm. The die sizes also differ: AMD's die is 233 mm² while Intel's die is 163 mm². The larger AMD die accommodates more cores and a more powerful integrated GPU.

Cache configurations differ in L2 and L3. AMD provides 1 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of L3 total. Intel provides 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 12 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has a larger aggregate cache pool despite having fewer cores.

Memory support differs in type but not in channel configuration. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The memory bandwidth favors AMD at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for Intel.

PCIe generation differs. AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes. Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 880M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 730.

The market segments differ. AMD targets the mobile embedded market, while Intel targets the desktop embedded market. The release dates also differ: Intel launched on January 13, 2025, while AMD launched on March 9, 2026. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $134, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part. Both processors have locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no benchmark entries at all, while the Intel Core 3 201E has a full suite of 17 recorded scores. This means the comparison must be drawn from the Intel part's measured results and the AMD part's specifications.

The Intel Core 3 201E scores 12,613 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 1,780 in Cinebench R23 single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5,297 multi-core and 747 single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 1,271 multi-core and 179 single-core. These scores place the Intel part at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 19,056.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core 3 201E show how tightly clustered its performance is. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19,047, a 0% difference. The Intel Core i5-12400F scores 19,039, a 0.1% difference. The Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18,982, a 0.4% difference. The AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18,979, a 0.4% difference. All four rivals sit within a 0.4% band of the Intel Core 3 201E's average score, which indicates the Intel part delivers performance in line with established mid-range processors.

The PassMark results for the Intel Core 3 201E show its workload-specific strengths. The single-thread score is 3,482, and the multithread score is 14,839. Integer math scores 43,894, floating point math scores 33,260, and extended instructions score 11,035. Data compression scores 164,160, data encryption scores 8,931, and random string sorting scores 17,783. The physics score is 1,141, and the find prime numbers score is 57.

For the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i, the 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.00 GHz boost clock suggests strong multi-threaded potential relative to the Intel part's 4-core, 8-thread design. The AMD part's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and 4 nm process node also indicate a more modern platform. However, without recorded benchmark scores, the database cannot confirm how the AMD part performs in actual workloads.

The Intel part's 60 W TDP and desktop socket position it as a higher-power, higher-thermal-envelope processor. The AMD part's 28 W TDP positions it as an efficiency-first part. The recorded data shows that the Intel Core 3 201E competes directly with processors in the 19,000 average score range, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i's position in the database is defined entirely by its specifications and its 50th percentile standing.