AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 vs Intel Core 3 N355 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 against the Intel Core 3 N355. The AMD processor has no recorded benchmark scores in the database at all, while the Intel part has a complete set of Cinebench and PassMark results. This absence of comparative data means no direct score-by-score comparison can be drawn between the two processors.

What the data does show is how the Intel Core 3 N355 positions itself against its own nearest rivals. The Intel part posts an average benchmark score of 13,492, placing it at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i3-12100F, scores 13,494, a delta of 0 percent, meaning the two are effectively tied in average performance. The Intel Core 5 120UL sits slightly ahead at 13,594, a 0.8 percent advantage over the N355. The Intel Core i5-9500 trails by a negligible 0.3 percent at 13,452, while the Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1 percent behind at 13,351.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 holds a 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs, but with no benchmark scores recorded, this percentile reflects a placeholder position rather than measured performance. The Intel part's 68th percentile, by contrast, is backed by 17 individual benchmark results across Cinebench and PassMark workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in core architecture, manufacturing process, and platform features. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It contains 10 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, part of the Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) generation, and contains 8 cores with 8 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. Its base clock is 1.90 GHz and boost clock is 3.90 GHz.

Manufacturing processes differ substantially. The AMD part is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel part uses a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, with no die size recorded in the database. These process differences correlate with the power envelopes: the AMD processor has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel processor is rated at 15 watts.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The AMD processor has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor has 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 design gives it 10 MB of total L2 across all cores, while the Intel part's shared 2 MB L2 is a single pool.

Memory support also differs. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel memory bus, delivering 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel processor supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel memory bus, with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity follows the same pattern: the AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel processor provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD part uses the Radeon 880M, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 770. Both processors are mobile-market segments and currently active in production. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1264. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part was released on 2026-02-28, while the Intel part was released on 2025-01-06.

Where Each One Wins

Without benchmark scores for the AMD processor, the analysis of workload-specific wins relies on architectural characteristics from the database rather than measured results.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is positioned for workloads that benefit from high thread counts and large memory bandwidth. Its 20 threads versus the Intel part's 8 threads gives it a structural advantage in heavily parallel tasks. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the Intel part's 38.4 GB/s, which benefits memory-intensive applications such as large dataset processing, virtualization, and embedded analytics workloads. The 16 MB L3 cache also supports data-heavy workflows.

The Intel Core 3 N355, with its 15-watt TDP, is suited for power-constrained embedded and mobile deployments where the 28-watt AMD part may exceed thermal budgets. Its measured benchmark results show a balanced profile across Cinebench and PassMark tests. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5,262 and single-core score of 1,039 indicate competent general-purpose performance. PassMark integer math at 33,894 and floating-point math at 22,695 show solid arithmetic throughput. Data compression scored 117,435, while data encryption scored 8,121. The single-thread PassMark result of 2,153 confirms reasonable per-core performance despite the modest 3.90 GHz boost clock.

The Intel part's measured scores place it at the 68th percentile, and its nearest rivals include desktop parts like the Core i3-12100F, which suggests the N355 competes in a performance band that spans older desktop quad-cores and newer mobile parts. The AMD part's 50th percentile without scores suggests an unverified position, so no performance claim can be made from the database.

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread count difference between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 and the Intel Core 3 N355?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 10 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The AMD processor supports simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel processor does not.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 3 N355 has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Intel Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

Q: What benchmark scores does the Intel Core 3 N355 have in the database?

A: The Intel Core 3 N355 scores 5,262 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 1,039 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 3,612 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, 509 in Cinebench R20 single-core, 822 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, and 168 in Cinebench R15 single-core. PassMark results include 10,174 in multithread, 2,153 in single-thread, 33,894 in integer math, 22,695 in floating-point math, 117,435 in data compression, and 8,121 in data encryption.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its 50th percentile position is not supported by measured data.

Q: What are the power ratings for both processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a TDP of 28 watts. The Intel Core 3 N355 has a TDP of 15 watts.

The Verdict

The data in the database supports only limited conclusions. The Intel Core 3 N355 has a complete set of measured benchmarks, an average score of 13,492, and a 68th percentile ranking. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-12100F, is essentially tied at 13,494 with a 0 percent delta. The Intel Core 5 120UL is 0.8 percent ahead, and the Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1 percent behind. These comparisons place the N355 in a competitive band among low-power mobile and older desktop processors.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has no recorded benchmarks, so its 50th percentile is an unverified placeholder. The database cannot support any performance claim for the AMD processor. What the architecture data does show is that the AMD part offers 20 threads, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 16 MB of L3 cache, all within a 28-watt TDP. The Intel part counters with 8 threads, a 3.90 GHz boost clock, 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, 6 MB of L3 cache, and a 15-watt TDP.

For users selecting between these two processors based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Core 3 N355 is the only one with verified performance. Its measured results confirm it as a functional embedded processor that sits near the performance of the Core i3-12100F. The AMD part's architectural specifications suggest higher theoretical capability in multithreaded and memory-bound scenarios, but without benchmark scores, those capabilities remain unconfirmed. The database cannot endorse the AMD part for any specific workload until measurements are recorded.

The power envelope difference is clear: the Intel part draws 15 watts versus the AMD part's 28 watts. For thermally constrained designs, the Intel part has a documented advantage. For designs that need maximum thread count and memory bandwidth, the AMD part's specifications are superior on paper, but the absence of benchmark data prevents any quantitative validation. The verdict from the database is that the Intel Core 3 N355 is the only processor in this comparison with proven, measured performance.