AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

The Verdict

The database contains benchmark results for the Intel Processor N150, but no recorded measurements for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i. The AMD part has an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking, while the Intel Processor N150 has an average benchmark score of 1025 and sits at the 28th percentile. The AMD processor's nearest rivals list is empty, making direct score comparisons impossible. The Intel part, however, can be positioned against its nearest rivals: it sits 0.1% above the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, 0.1% below the Intel Core i3-4340, and 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-5650U.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i should be selected by users who need a high-core-count mobile processor with large cache capacity, dual-channel memory, and ECC support. The Intel Processor N150 should be selected by users who need a low-power, compact solution with measured benchmark scores and a known performance profile. The data does not support a direct performance comparison between the two, as the AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores. The Intel part's measured performance places it in the lower quartile of all CPUs, while the AMD part's percentile value of 50 indicates a mid-range position, but this percentile is not backed by any actual benchmark data in the database.

Architecture Differences

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. The Intel Processor N150 uses the Twin Lake architecture, part of the Intel Processor generation based on Alder Lake-N, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is significant: 4 nm versus 10 nm, which typically indicates a more advanced manufacturing technology for the AMD part.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The AMD processor has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel processor has 4 cores and 4 threads. The AMD part therefore offers simultaneous multithreading, doubling its thread count over its core count, while the Intel part offers no such feature. The AMD part's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel part's base clock is 0.10 GHz with a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The thermal design power differs by a factor of over four: the AMD part is rated at 28 watts, the Intel part at 6 watts.

Cache configurations are notably different. The AMD processor provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor provides 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's per-core L2 allocation is larger when scaled across all cores, while the Intel part has a shared L2 pool. The AMD part's L3 cache is 2 MB larger in total.

Memory support diverges sharply. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and ECC support. The Intel processor supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s and no ECC support. The AMD part's memory bandwidth is more than double that of the Intel part. PCIe capabilities also differ: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part uses Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD processor integrates a Radeon 880M GPU, while the Intel processor integrates UHD Graphics 730. Both parts are mobile market segment products and are currently active in production. The AMD processor uses the AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1264. The AMD die size is recorded as 233 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Intel part. The Intel part has a part number of SRPNR; the AMD part's part number is unknown. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part's release date is recorded as 2026-03-08, while the Intel part's release date is 2024-11-19.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and the Intel Processor N150. The wins count for each part is zero. The AMD part has no benchmark scores recorded in any test. The Intel part has four recorded benchmark results, all from Cinebench tests.

The Intel Processor N150's measured scores are as follows. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 422.5. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 153.15. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2590.5. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 935. These results show a multi-core score roughly 16 times larger than the single-core score in R23 terms, consistent with a 4-core, 4-thread processor without SMT. The R15 multi-core score is about 2.76 times the single-core score.

The AMD part's average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 50. The Intel part's average benchmark score is 1025, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 28. The nearest rivals for the Intel part provide context: the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T averages 1024, the Intel Core i3-4340 averages 1026, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U averages 1024, and the Intel Core i7-5650U averages 1027. The Intel Processor N150 is within 0.2% of all four rivals, indicating its measured performance clusters tightly around these older desktop and mobile parts.

Because the AMD part has no recorded benchmarks, no quantitative head-to-head wins can be established. The analysis must rely on architectural specifications for the AMD part and on the measured data for the Intel part. The AMD part's boost clock of 5.00 GHz, 8-core/16-thread configuration, and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth suggest a substantially higher performance ceiling than the Intel part's 3.60 GHz boost, 4-core/4-thread configuration, and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, but this is an inference from specifications, not from measured benchmark data.

FAQ

Q: Does the database contain any benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i?

A: No. The AMD part has an empty benchmark list, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals. The Intel Processor N150 has four recorded Cinebench scores.

Q: What is the Intel Processor N150's average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Intel Processor N150 has an average benchmark score of 1025 and sits at the 28th percentile versus all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T, scores 1024, a 0.1% difference.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading; the Intel part does not.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The AMD processor supports 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X bus with ECC. The Intel processor supports 38.4 GB/s over a single-channel DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR5 bus without ECC.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i is rated at 28 watts. The Intel Processor N150 is rated at 6 watts.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD processor has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel processor has a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The AMD base clock is 2.00 GHz, while the Intel base clock is 0.10 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i wins on architectural specifications across every major category recorded in the database. It has double the cores and four times the threads of the Intel Processor N150. Its boost clock is 1.40 GHz higher, and its base clock is 1.90 GHz higher. Its L3 cache is 2 MB larger, and its per-core L2 cache is 1 MB per core versus a 2 MB shared pool for the Intel part. Its memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is more than double the Intel part's 38.4 GB/s. It supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. Its PCIe Gen 4 interface with 16 lanes exceeds the Intel part's Gen 3 interface with 9 lanes. Its integrated Radeon 880M graphics represent a different GPU class than the Intel UHD Graphics 730. The AMD part's 28-watt TDP is higher than the Intel part's 6-watt TDP, which indicates a higher power envelope for sustained performance, though no efficiency measurements are recorded.

The Intel Processor N150 wins on the only measured performance data available in the database. Its four Cinebench scores provide a concrete performance profile: 422.5 in R15 multi-core, 153.15 in R15 single-core, 2590.5 in R23 multi-core, and 935 in R23 single-core. Its average benchmark score of 1025 places it at the 28th percentile, with nearest rivals within 0.2% in either direction. The Intel part also wins on power draw, with a 6-watt TDP that is less than a quarter of the AMD part's 28-watt TDP. The Intel part uses a smaller socket form factor (Intel BGA 1264 versus AMD Socket FP8) and supports a wider range of memory types including DDR4, which may be relevant for certain system designs. Its release date of 2024-11-19 is earlier than the AMD part's 2026-03-08, indicating a longer market presence.

For workloads that depend on multi-threaded throughput, large cache, high memory bandwidth, and ECC reliability, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i's specifications position it as the stronger candidate. For workloads that require minimal power consumption, a compact BGA package, and a verified benchmark profile, the Intel Processor N150 is the only part with measured data to support its claims. The database shows no overlap in measured performance, so the selection between these two parts must be made on architectural grounds for the AMD part and on measured grounds for the Intel part.