AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i vs Intel Processor U301L Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and the Intel Processor U301L?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Processor U301L has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i boosts up to 5.00 GHz, compared to the Intel Processor U301L's 2.20 GHz boost clock.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i supports ECC memory, while the Intel Processor U301L does not.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i has a TDP of 28 watts, and the Intel Processor U301L has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i is built on a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Processor U301L uses Intel's 10 nm process.

Q: What integrated graphics do these processors feature?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i includes Radeon 880M graphics, while the Intel Processor U301L includes UHD Graphics 64EU.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i and Intel Processor U301L represent fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD part belongs to the Gorgon Point codename family and uses the Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Processor U301L, by contrast, is based on Raptor Lake architecture, uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename, and is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process by Intel itself.

Core topology diverges sharply. The AMD processor provides 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel processor offers 5 cores and 6 threads. This reflects a hybrid core arrangement on the Intel side, where not all cores contribute equal threading capability. The AMD chip has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, a 2.5 GHz boost headroom. The Intel chip starts at 1.20 GHz and reaches only 2.20 GHz at boost, a 1.0 GHz headroom.

Cache layouts also differ. Both processors use 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i allocates 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel Processor U301L allocates 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache totals are identical in capacity at 8 MB, but the AMD implementation is listed as 8 MB without a shared designation, whereas the Intel implementation is explicitly 8 MB shared.

Memory support separates the two platforms. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory across a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported by the AMD part but not by the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity differs in lane count. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Processor U301L provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The AMD processor's die size is recorded at 233 mm², while the Intel processor's die size is not recorded. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, and the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. The Intel part has a recorded part number of SRPKFQ5CW, while the AMD part's part number is unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently holds no head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i versus the Intel Processor U301L. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counts for both sides are zero. Both processors register an average benchmark score of zero and sit at the 50th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Since no measured performance data exists, direct numerical comparisons of workload performance cannot be made from the recorded data. The available comparison points are structural: core count, thread count, clock speeds, cache configuration, memory bandwidth, and platform features. The AMD processor's 8 cores and 16 threads represent a 60% higher core count and a 166.7% higher thread count relative to the Intel processor's 5 cores and 6 threads. The AMD boost clock of 5.00 GHz is 127.3% higher than the Intel boost clock of 2.20 GHz.

The Intel processor's L2 cache per core is 25% larger than the AMD processor's L2 per core (1.25 MB versus 1 MB), which could favor certain cache-sensitive workloads on a per-core basis. However, the AMD processor has more total cores, so aggregate L2 capacity favors AMD: 8 MB total L2 across 8 cores versus 6.25 MB total L2 across 5 cores. L3 cache is equal at 8 MB.

Memory bandwidth is a clear differentiator where data exists. The AMD processor's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is a recorded specification, while the Intel processor has no recorded memory bandwidth figure. The AMD part also supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5. ECC memory support on the AMD side adds a reliability feature absent from the Intel side.

The absence of benchmark data means percentile rankings and average scores do not discriminate between the two. Both sit at the 50th percentile with zero average scores. The nearest rivals arrays are empty for both processors, so no adjacent comparison points exist in the database.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i holds the structural advantage in most compute-oriented specifications. It provides more cores, more threads, a substantially higher boost clock, a smaller manufacturing process, higher memory bandwidth, and ECC support. The Intel Processor U301L counters with a lower TDP, a larger L2 cache per core, support for DDR4 memory, and a recorded launch MSRP of $107.

For workloads that scale with core count and thread count, the AMD processor's 8 cores and 16 threads outweigh the Intel processor's 5 cores and 6 threads. For workloads that depend on single-core frequency, the AMD boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 2.20 GHz is a decisive gap. For power-constrained designs, the Intel processor's 15 watt TDP is lower than the AMD processor's 28 watt TDP.

The Intel processor's support for DDR4 memory may matter for platforms reusing existing memory infrastructure. The AMD processor's support for LPDDR5X and its recorded 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth indicate a higher-performance memory path. The AMD processor's PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes doubles the Intel processor's 8 lanes, which matters for expansion and discrete device connectivity.

Neither processor has benchmark results in the database, so the verdict rests on specifications rather than measured performance. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i is the stronger processor on paper for multi-threaded and high-frequency workloads. The Intel Processor U301L is the lower-power option with legacy memory flexibility.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field. Core count: AMD 8, Intel 5. Thread count: AMD 16, Intel 6. Base clock: AMD 2.00 GHz, Intel 1.20 GHz. Boost clock: AMD 5.00 GHz, Intel 2.20 GHz. TDP: AMD 28 watts, Intel 15 watts. Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700.

Process node: AMD 4 nm from TSMC, Intel 10 nm from Intel. Codename: Gorgon Point for AMD, Raptor Lake-PS for Intel. Generation: Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) for AMD, Intel Processor (Raptor Lake) for Intel. L1 cache per core is equal at 80 KB. L2 cache per core: AMD 1 MB, Intel 1.25 MB. L3 cache: AMD 8 MB, Intel 8 MB shared.

Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth: AMD 89.6 GB/s, Intel not recorded. ECC memory: AMD true, Intel false. PCIe: AMD Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 880M, Intel UHD Graphics 64EU.

Release date: AMD 2026-03-08, Intel 2024-04-07. Launch MSRP: AMD none recorded, Intel $107. Die size: AMD 233 mm², Intel not recorded. Part number: AMD unknown, Intel SRPKFQ5CW. Market segment for both is mobile, and both are active production parts. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164i wins in multi-threaded compute scenarios. Its 8 cores and 16 threads provide double the thread count of the Intel Processor U301L, which is decisive for parallel workloads such as compilation, rendering, and virtualized environments. The 5.00 GHz boost clock also gives the AMD part an advantage in single-threaded and lightly threaded tasks, where frequency directly drives performance.

The AMD processor wins on memory performance. Its recorded 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and support for LPDDR5X provide a faster data path than the Intel part, which has no recorded bandwidth figure and supports only DDR4 and DDR5. ECC memory support on the AMD side makes it suitable for applications requiring error correction, such as data processing and long-running server-like workloads.

The AMD processor wins on expansion capability. Its PCIe Gen 4 implementation with 16 lanes offers twice the lane count of the Intel processor's 8 lanes. This supports more discrete devices, additional storage controllers, or higher-bandwidth peripherals. The smaller 4 nm process node also indicates a more advanced manufacturing technology relative to Intel's 10 nm node.

The Intel Processor U301L wins on power efficiency. Its 15 watt TDP is 46.4% lower than the AMD processor's 28 watt TDP. For fanless designs, battery-powered systems, or thermally constrained chassis, the lower TDP is a meaningful advantage. The Intel part also supports DDR4 memory, which allows platform designers to use existing, lower-cost memory modules.

The Intel processor wins on legacy compatibility. Socket 1700 is a widely deployed platform, and DDR4 support extends the usable memory ecosystem. The recorded launch MSRP of $107 provides a reference point for the Intel part's positioning, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

For integrated graphics, the AMD Radeon 880M and Intel UHD Graphics 64EU are both present, but the database contains no benchmark results to differentiate their performance. The AMD processor's release date is later, and its production status is active, matching the Intel part's active status. The AMD processor's die size of 233 mm² is recorded, while the Intel die size is not, so no die-size comparison is possible.