AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Core 7 350: a comparison between AMD's 8-core, 16-thread Gorgon Point processor and Intel's 6-core, 6-thread Wildcat Lake part. The Intel chip holds a commanding lead in the recorded benchmark database, posting an average score of 17,779 compared to the AMD processor's 0, which places the Intel part in the 71st percentile of all CPUs versus the AMD part's 50th. The Core 7 350 also carries a launch MSRP of $469. The data reflects a substantial performance gap, though the architectural profiles of each chip tell a more nuanced story about their respective strengths.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 7 350 is the only part in this comparison with recorded benchmark scores, and the results are extensive. Across Cinebench releases, the Intel chip delivers consistent multi-threaded performance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1,220; in R20 multi-core, it reaches 5,373; and in R23 multi-core, it hits 8,030. Single-core results scale similarly: 292 in R15, 758 in R20, and 2,046 in R23. These figures indicate a processor that scales predictably across workloads and software versions, with the R23 multi-core score representing the highest sustained throughput in the recorded data.

The PassMark suite provides additional granularity. The Intel part scores 15,170 in multithreaded tests and 4,100 in single-thread tests. In specialized workloads, it posts 143,123 in data compression, 10,933 in data encryption, and 12,045 in extended instructions. Floating-point math reaches 42,809, while integer math hits 33,734. The find prime numbers test yields a score of 107, physics simulation scores 1,173, and random string sorting finishes at 17,238. These numbers show a processor that handles encryption and compression tasks with particular efficiency, while the prime number and physics scores are comparatively modest in absolute terms.

Because the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no recorded benchmarks in the database, there are no direct head-to-head wins to report for either side. The Intel Core 7 350 dominates the recorded data purely by virtue of having measurable results. The AMD part's average benchmark score of 0 and its 50th percentile ranking reflect the absence of test data, not necessarily a lack of capability. The Intel chip's 71st percentile ranking, however, is based on actual measurements and places it ahead of a significant portion of the CPU field.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core 7 350 provide context for its standing. The Intel Core 5 221TE posts an average score of 17,860, which is 0.5% higher than the Core 7 350's 17,779. The AMD EPYC 9374F scores 17,693, a 0.5% deficit. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT reaches 17,891, 0.6% ahead, and the Intel Core 5 120U hits 17,898, 0.7% ahead. These deltas are tight, placing the Core 7 350 within a narrow band of similarly performing processors. The data shows that while the Intel part leads the AMD P164i in recorded results, it sits in a crowded performance tier where small percentage differences separate competitors.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 350 wins every recorded benchmark category because it is the only chip with data. Its PassMark results indicate a processor optimized for throughput-oriented tasks. Data compression at 143,123 and encryption at 10,933 suggest strong integer and cryptographic execution. Extended instructions at 12,045 point to capable SIMD and vector processing. Floating-point math at 42,809 outperforms integer math at 33,734, showing a slight bias toward FP-heavy workloads. Random string sorting at 17,238 demonstrates solid memory and cache handling for sorting algorithms.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no recorded wins in the database. The absence of benchmarks means the analysis cannot assign it any performance victories. Its architectural specifications, however, hint at potential strengths. With 8 cores and 16 threads, it offers double the thread count of the Intel part. The 5.00 GHz boost clock exceeds the Intel chip's 4.80 GHz. A dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth compares favorably to the Intel part's single-channel 59.7 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on the AMD chip, a feature absent on the Intel side. These specifications suggest the AMD processor could excel in memory-bandwidth-sensitive and multi-threaded workloads, but the recorded data does not confirm this.

The Intel Core 7 350's 15 W TDP versus the AMD part's 28 W TDP indicates a power efficiency advantage for Intel in thermally constrained environments. The Intel chip also uses a 3 nm process node compared to AMD's 4 nm, which may contribute to its lower power draw. For users prioritizing battery life or compact cooling solutions, the Intel part's recorded performance combined with lower TDP makes it the safer choice based on available data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their core architectures. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 / Zen 5c cores. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and the Core 5 generation, with 6 cores and 6 threads. Its base clock is 1.50 GHz, and its boost clock is 4.80 GHz. The AMD part offers more cores, more threads, and higher clock speeds on paper.

Cache hierarchies differ markedly. The AMD chip provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may benefit latency-sensitive single-threaded workloads, while AMD's larger total L3 (8 MB versus 6 MB) could help with multi-threaded data sharing. The die size for the AMD part is 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded.

Process technology separates the two as well. AMD uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while Intel uses a 3 nm process from its own foundry. The Intel process node is smaller, which typically allows for higher transistor density and lower power consumption, though the AMD part's higher TDP of 28 W versus Intel's 15 W suggests the AMD chip is designed for a different power envelope. Memory support is similar in type (both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X), but the AMD part uses a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on AMD only.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD chip provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel chip provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). This gives AMD a significant advantage in expandability for discrete GPUs or storage. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 880M, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not an option on either.

The Verdict

Based strictly on recorded data, the Intel Core 7 350 is the clear choice for users who need verified performance. Its 17,779 average benchmark score, 71st percentile ranking, and comprehensive Cinebench and PassMark results provide a concrete performance baseline. The chip's nearest rivals, the Intel Core 5 221TE, AMD EPYC 9374F, AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, and Intel Core 5 120U, all score within 0.7% of it, indicating a competitive but crowded field. For workloads like data compression, encryption, and floating-point math, the recorded scores show the Intel part delivers strong, measurable results.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i cannot be recommended based on benchmark data because no data exists. Its specifications, however, suggest a different design philosophy. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.00 GHz boost clock and dual-channel 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth points to a processor built for parallel throughput and memory-intensive tasks. The 28 W TDP and 233 mm² die size indicate a more power-hungry, physically larger chip. ECC memory support and 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes make it suitable for embedded and server-adjacent applications where reliability and expandability matter.

The Intel Core 7 350, at a launch MSRP of $469, offers proven performance with lower power consumption and a smaller process node. Its single-channel memory bus and 6 PCIe lanes limit bandwidth and expansion, but its recorded scores show it handles common workloads efficiently. Users who need verified results and lower power draw should favor the Intel part. Users who prioritize core count, memory bandwidth, ECC support, and PCIe lanes may find the AMD part's specifications appealing, but they must accept the absence of recorded benchmark data. The database currently contains only one measurable performer, and that performer is Intel.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core 7 350?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 has an average benchmark score of 17,779, placing it in the 71st percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core 7 350 has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 7 350 does not.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the Intel Core 7 350 in the database?

A: The nearest rivals are the Intel Core 5 221TE with an average score of 17,860 (0.5% higher), the AMD EPYC 9374F with 17,693 (0.5% lower), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT with 17,891 (0.6% higher), and the Intel Core 5 120U with 17,898 (0.7% higher).