AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Core 3 N350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 3 N350 is the only processor in this comparison with recorded benchmark scores in the database. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no benchmark entries, so the head-to-head comparison is one-sided. The Core 3 N350 delivers an average benchmark score of 9903, placing it at the 66th percentile of all CPUs tracked in the database. Its nearest rivals in performance include the Intel Core i7-3770 with an average score of 9706, which is 2% slower, and the Intel Core i5-1035G1 at 9684, which trails by 2.3%. On the upper end, the AMD EPYC 7F52 scores 10159, beating the Core 3 N350 by 2.5%, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 scores 10230, ahead by 3.2%.

Looking at the Cinebench results, the Core 3 N350 scores 6274 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 2635 in R20 multi-core, and 632 in R15 multi-core. Single-core performance shows 885 in R23, 371 in R20, and 89 in R15. These figures indicate a processor oriented toward efficiency rather than raw throughput. The PassMark suite tells a similar story: multi-thread performance is 7382, single-thread performance is 1974, and integer math scores 27669. Floating-point math reaches 17781, while extended instructions score 3981. Data compression completes at 80444, data encryption at 5693, and random string sorting at 10102. Physics simulation scores 446, and prime number finding scores 20.

Because the AMD side has no recorded measurements, the database shows zero wins for the Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and one-sided data for the Intel part. What can be stated from the available information is that the Core 3 N350 occupies a specific performance tier, one that sits within a few percentage points of older desktop and mobile processors. The 66th percentile ranking confirms it lands above the median CPU in the database, but the delta percentages against its nearest rivals show a narrow band of competition. No head-to-head benchmark entries exist for the pair, so direct comparisons of specific workloads cannot be drawn from measured data. The analysis must rely on the specification differences and the recorded performance of the Intel chip alone.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing backgrounds. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core 3 N350 uses the Twin Lake architecture, listed as part of the Core 3 generation based on Alder Lake-N, and is manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel. No die size is recorded for the Intel chip.

Core counts are identical at 8, but threading differs significantly. The AMD part supports 16 threads, meaning it implements simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part has 8 threads, one per core, with no multithreading support. Cache layouts also diverge. The Ryzen AI Embedded P164i provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core 3 N350 offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. This means the AMD processor has a larger total cache footprint when accounting for the per-core L2 allocation across eight cores, while the Intel chip uses a smaller shared pool.

Memory support separates the two considerably. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel processor supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the AMD side, while the Intel chip does not list ECC support. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part offers Gen 3 with 9 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics are another point of divergence. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses the Radeon 880M, while the Intel Core 3 N350 uses UHD Graphics 770. Clock speeds show a wide gap. The AMD processor has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel processor has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Thermal design power differs sharply as well, with the AMD part rated at 28 W and the Intel part at 7 W. The AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1264. The Intel part has a recorded part number of SRPNS, while the AMD part's part number is unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 16 threads across 8 cores, while the Intel Core 3 N350 has 8 threads across 8 cores. The AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading; the Intel part does not.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel Core 3 N350 has a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s, supporting DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i is rated at 28 W. The Intel Core 3 N350 is rated at 7 W.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 N350 does not list ECC support.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 N350 boosts to 3.90 GHz. The AMD part also has a higher base clock at 2.00 GHz compared to 0.10 GHz on the Intel part.

Q: What are the nearest performance rivals for the Intel Core 3 N350?

A: The Intel Core i7-3770 is 2% slower, the Intel Core i5-1035G1 is 2.3% slower, the AMD EPYC 7F52 is 2.5% faster, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 is 3.2% faster. These are the only recorded comparisons in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 N350 uses 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz versus 0.10 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.00 GHz versus 3.90 GHz. Thermal design power is 28 W versus 7 W. Sockets differ: AMD Socket FP8 for the AMD part, Intel BGA 1264 for the Intel part.

Process node and foundry differ: 4 nm at TSMC for AMD, 10 nm at Intel for the Intel chip. Die size is recorded only for the AMD part at 233 mm². Cache configurations differ in both size and organization. The AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB L3. The Intel part has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: DDR5 and LPDDR5X for AMD, DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 for Intel. Memory bus is dual-channel for AMD and single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD and 38.4 GB/s for Intel. ECC support is present on AMD, absent on Intel. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD, Gen 3 with 9 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 880M for AMD and UHD Graphics 770 for Intel. Release dates differ: the AMD part is dated 2026-03-08, the Intel part 2025-01-06. The Intel part has a part number of SRPNS; the AMD part number is unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 N350 wins in any scenario where measured performance data exists, since it is the only chip with benchmarks in the database. Its 66th percentile ranking and average score of 9903 give it a defined position among all tracked CPUs. It operates within a close performance band, trading blows with processors like the Intel Core i7-3770 and Intel Core i5-1035G1, both within 2.3% of its score. Its 7 W thermal design power makes it suitable for low-power mobile designs, and its support for DDR4 alongside DDR5 and LPDDR5 gives system designers memory flexibility. The single-channel memory bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth cap memory-intensive workloads, but the low power envelope is a clear advantage for fanless or compact systems.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i wins on raw specification potential. It offers double the thread count, a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz, a much higher base clock of 2.00 GHz, and significantly more memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel bus. Its 28 W thermal design power is four times that of the Intel chip, which reflects its higher performance ceiling. The AMD part also brings ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, and a larger L3 cache at 8 MB versus 6 MB. The Radeon 880M integrated graphics are positioned above the UHD Graphics 770 in the AMD product stack. For workloads that depend on multithreading, memory throughput, or ECC reliability, the AMD specification sheet is stronger. However, no benchmark data exists to confirm how those specifications translate into measured performance.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 3 N350 is the only processor in this comparison with recorded benchmark results. Its average score of 9903 and 66th percentile placement make it a mid-tier performer, closely matched with the Intel Core i7-3770 and Intel Core i5-1035G1. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i presents a stronger specification profile on paper, with 16 threads, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, dual-channel memory at 89.6 GB/s, ECC support, and PCIe Gen 4. The absence of benchmark data for the AMD part means its actual performance cannot be verified against the Intel chip in the database.

For systems where power efficiency is the priority, the Intel Core 3 N350 at 7 W is the clear choice. For applications that require ECC memory, higher memory bandwidth, or more threads, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i offers the necessary features, subject to its higher 28 W power draw. The Intel chip supports a broader range of memory types, including DDR4, which may matter for cost-sensitive designs. The AMD chip is limited to DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Each processor serves a different segment, and the recorded data only validates the Intel side. Until benchmark entries appear for the AMD part, its performance claims rest on specifications alone.