AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Core 5 211TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and Intel Core 5 211TE. However, the Intel Core 5 211TE has a full set of recorded benchmark scores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no individual benchmark scores listed. The Intel part's average benchmark score is 15370, placing it in the 69th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The AMD part's percentile rank is 50, with an average benchmark score of 0, indicating the absence of measured results rather than a performance of zero.

For the Intel Core 5 211TE, the recorded Cinebench results show a multi-core score of 12201 in Cinebench R23, a single-core score of 1722 in the same test, a multi-core score of 5124 in Cinebench R20, a single-core score of 723 in Cinebench R20, a multi-core score of 1229 in Cinebench R15, and a single-core score of 173 in Cinebench R15. These scores establish a baseline for multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering performance.

The PassMark suite for the Intel Core 5 211TE includes a multithread score of 11685, a single-thread score of 1408, integer math at 33991, floating point math at 26150, extended instructions at 8615, data compression at 133434, data encryption at 7231, find prime numbers at 72, physics at 1278, and random string sorting at 14838. The single-thread test appears twice in the database with identical scores of 1408 in both the "passmark_single_thread" and "passmark_singlethread" entries.

Comparing the Intel Core 5 211TE to its nearest rivals in the database, the AMD EPYC 7543 has an average score of 15477, which is 0.7% higher than the Intel part. The AMD EPYC 7702P has an average score of 15130, which is 1.6% lower. The AMD Ryzen 3 7440U has an average score of 15682, which is 2% higher. The Intel Core i3-1315U has an average score of 15022, which is 2.3% lower. The Intel Core 5 211TE sits between the AMD EPYC 7702P and the AMD EPYC 7543 in average score, while trailing both the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U and the AMD EPYC 7543 by small margins. It beats the Intel Core i3-1315U by 2.3% and the AMD EPYC 7702P by 1.6%.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i lacks recorded benchmark results, so no direct numerical comparison between the two processors can be made from the database. The Intel Core 5 211TE's 69th percentile ranking indicates it performs better than roughly two-thirds of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD part's 50th percentile is a placeholder value given the lack of measured scores.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split in deployment scenarios. The Intel Core 5 211TE is the only part with recorded performance metrics, and its average benchmark score of 15370 places it in the 69th percentile of all CPUs. It delivers measured multi-core and single-core results across both Cinebench and PassMark tests. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no benchmark scores in the database, so any performance comparison must rely on architectural specifications rather than measured results.

For workloads where verified performance data is required, the Intel Core 5 211TE is the documented choice. Its nearest rival comparisons show it within 2.3% of the Intel Core i3-1315U, 1.6% above the AMD EPYC 7702P, and 0.7% below the AMD EPYC 7543. These margins place it in a consistent performance band relative to other server and mobile parts in the database.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i presents a different profile. It uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC, has 8 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 2.00 GHz, a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and a TDP of 28 watts. The Intel Core 5 211TE uses a 10 nm node from Intel, has 10 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 1.70 GHz, a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, and a TDP of 45 watts. The AMD part draws less power and has a higher boost clock, while the Intel part has more physical cores and a higher TDP.

The Intel Core 5 211TE is listed with a launch MSRP of $221. No pricing information is available for the AMD part. The production status for both is Active, and both support ECC memory. The Intel part was released on 2025-01-12, while the AMD part has a release date of 2026-03-08.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing processes and foundries. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses a 4 nm process node fabricated by TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core 5 211TE uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 215 mm². The AMD part is codenamed Gorgon Point and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel part is codenamed Bartlett Lake and belongs to the Core 5 generation.

Core and thread counts differ. The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part has 10 cores and 16 threads. Both support simultaneous multithreading, resulting in equal thread counts despite the core difference. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel part has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The AMD part has the higher boost ceiling by 0.20 GHz.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part provides more L2 cache per core and substantially more L3 cache overall. The L3 cache difference is significant: 20 MB shared versus 8 MB.

Memory support varies. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The AMD part has a higher theoretical memory bandwidth, while the Intel part offers compatibility with both DDR4 and DDR5 modules.

PCIe capabilities differ. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part provides a newer PCIe generation, which allows for higher bandwidth per lane in supported devices.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD part uses a Radeon 880M. The Intel part uses UHD Graphics 730. The AMD part targets the mobile embedded segment and uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part targets the desktop market and uses Intel Socket 1700.

Power envelopes differ considerably. The AMD part has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel part has a TDP of 45 watts. The AMD part draws 17 watts less at its rated TDP. The AMD part also has a lower die size advantage in terms of process node, using 4 nm versus 10 nm.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 5 211TE has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports faster PCIe?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Q: What is the L3 cache size on each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 211TE has 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has a TDP of 28 watts. The Intel Core 5 211TE has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 211TE support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 5 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X only.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211TE wins on measured performance data. It has an average benchmark score of 15370 and a 69th percentile ranking across all CPUs in the database. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12201 and single-core score of 1722 provide concrete reference points. PassMark results show a multithread score of 11685, single-thread score of 1408, integer math at 33991, and floating point math at 26150. It also has more physical cores, with 10 versus 8, and more L3 cache, with 20 MB shared versus 8 MB.

The Intel part wins on PCIe bandwidth capability with Gen 5 support and on memory flexibility with both DDR4 and DDR5 support. Its 45 watt TDP allows for a higher sustained power draw, which can support sustained multi-core workloads under the right cooling conditions. Its nearest rival comparisons show it performing within 2.3% of the Intel Core i3-1315U and 1.6% above the AMD EPYC 7702P.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i wins on efficiency characteristics. Its TDP of 28 watts is lower than the Intel part's 45 watts, and its 4 nm process node from TSMC is finer than the Intel part's 10 nm node. The AMD part has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz, and a higher base clock at 2.00 GHz versus 1.70 GHz. It also has higher theoretical memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s.

The AMD part uses a Radeon 880M integrated GPU, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 730. The AMD part targets the mobile embedded segment with AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part targets desktop with Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4, which is an older generation than the Intel part's Gen 5, but it draws less power and uses a smaller process node.

For workloads that depend on high single-thread boost clocks and lower power consumption, the AMD part's specifications give it an advantage. For workloads that depend on more physical cores, more L3 cache, and verified benchmark scores, the Intel part has the stronger profile. The Intel part's 10 cores and 20 MB of L3 cache make it better suited for cache-heavy multi-threaded tasks, while the AMD part's 5.00 GHz boost clock and 28 watt TDP make it better suited for power-constrained environments that need high clock speeds.

The release timeline also differs. The Intel part was released on 2025-01-12, while the AMD part is dated 2026-03-08. Both are listed as Active in production status. The Intel part has a known part number, SRQDL, and a launch MSRP of $221, while the AMD part's part number is listed as unknown and no launch MSRP is available.