AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 vs Intel Core 5 120UL Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 120UL is the only option with recorded benchmark data in the database. It delivers a 68th percentile performance ranking across all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 sits at the 50th percentile with no average benchmark score recorded. The Intel part’s nearest rivals are all close in average score, with the Core i3-12100F just 0.7% behind, the Core 3 N355 0.8% behind, and the Core i5-9500 1.1% behind, while the Core 3 304 leads it by 1.1%.

The AMD part, by contrast, has no benchmark entries and no nearest rivals, so its real-world performance cannot be assessed from the recorded data. The Intel Core 5 120UL is the clear choice for anyone needing verified performance metrics, particularly for single-threaded workloads where its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1266 stands out. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174, with its higher boost clock and larger core count, may appeal to those prioritizing raw specifications, but without benchmark evidence, its capabilities remain unquantified.

For workloads requiring multi-threaded throughput, the Intel part’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8974 and PassMark multi-thread score of 10558 provide concrete reference points. The AMD part’s 20 threads versus the Intel’s 12 suggest potential advantages in heavily parallel tasks, but the database offers no proof. The verdict is straightforward: choose the Intel Core 5 120UL for verified performance, or the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 only if specifications alone are sufficient.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 120UL boosts to 4.60 GHz. This gives the AMD part a 0.40 GHz advantage in maximum single-thread frequency.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both have 10 cores, but the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports 20 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120UL supports 12 threads. The AMD part offers 8 additional threads for multi-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 watts. The Intel part consumes 13 watts less power.

Q: Which processor has better recorded benchmark scores?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 120UL has benchmark data. Its average benchmark score is 13594, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8974 and a single-core score of 1266. The AMD part has no recorded scores.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 5 120UL does not.

Q: What are the process nodes for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core 5 120UL uses a 10 nm process from Intel. The AMD part’s node is smaller.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 belongs to the Gorgon Point generation, built on the Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core 5 120UL is based on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS variant, and uses a 10 nm process from Intel. These architectural foundations lead to different design priorities.

The AMD part features a hybrid core arrangement typical of Zen 5 / Zen 5c, combining performance and efficiency cores. It has 10 cores and 20 threads, indicating simultaneous multi-threading across all cores. The Intel part also has 10 cores but only 12 threads, which suggests a mix of performance and efficiency cores where only the performance cores support hyper-threading. This explains the thread count disparity.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, identical to the Intel part for L1, but the Intel part has 1.25 MB of L2 per core. For L3, the AMD part has 16 MB, while the Intel part has 12 MB shared. The AMD part’s larger L3 cache can benefit workloads with high data reuse.

Memory and I/O capabilities also diverge. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus but no recorded bandwidth figure. The AMD part includes ECC memory support, while the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics separate the two. The AMD part uses Radeon 880M graphics, while the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Both are integrated solutions, but their performance characteristics are not recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications reveal clear divergences between the two processors. 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 5 120UL has a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The AMD part runs 0.70 GHz higher at base and 0.40 GHz higher at boost.

Thread counts differ: the AMD part offers 20 threads versus the Intel part’s 12. TDP ratings are 28 watts for AMD and 15 watts for Intel. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. Process nodes are 4 nm (TSMC) for AMD and 10 nm (Intel) for Intel.

Cache specifications vary. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel part has 1.25 MB per core. L3 cache totals 16 MB for AMD and 12 MB shared for Intel. Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X for AMD, versus DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. The AMD part’s memory bandwidth is recorded as 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD part.

PCIe generations match at Gen 4, but lane counts differ: 16 lanes for AMD versus 8 lanes for Intel, both CPU-only. Integrated graphics are Radeon 880M for AMD and Iris Xe Graphics 80EU for Intel. Market segments are Mobile for AMD and Desktop for Intel. Release dates are 2026-02-28 for AMD and 2024-04-07 for Intel. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 and the Intel Core 5 120UL. Only the Intel part has any benchmark entries, and they cover a range of Cinebench and PassMark tests.

In Cinebench tests, the Intel Core 5 120UL scores 904 in R15 multi-core and 127 in R15 single-core. For R20, the scores are 3769 multi-core and 531 single-core. The R23 results show 8974 multi-core and 1266 single-core. These figures establish a baseline for the Intel part’s performance.

PassMark results for the Intel part include data compression at 109090, data encryption at 7685, extended instructions at 5203, and find prime numbers at 47. Floating point math scores 26311, integer math scores 38060, and multi-thread scores 10558. Physics scores 807, random string sorting scores 13610, and single-thread scores 2080. The average benchmark score is 13594.

Since the AMD part has no benchmark entries, a direct comparison of scores is impossible. The nearest rivals for the Intel part provide context: the Core i3-12100F averages 13494 (0.7% behind), the Core 3 N355 averages 13492 (0.8% behind), and the Core i5-9500 averages 13452 (1.1% behind). The Core 3 304 averages 13745, which is 1.1% ahead of the Intel part. These deltas show the Intel part sits within a tight performance cluster.

The absence of AMD data means no wins can be assigned to either processor. The recorded data favors the Intel part solely because it has measurements. The AMD part’s specifications, such as the 5.00 GHz boost clock and 20 threads, suggest potential advantages, but no benchmark confirms them.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on recorded data, the Intel Core 5 120UL wins in every measurable category. It has benchmark scores across Cinebench and PassMark, an average score of 13594, and a 68th percentile ranking. Its single-thread score of 2080 in PassMark indicates strong per-core performance, which suits applications that rely on low-latency, single-threaded execution.

The Intel part also wins on power efficiency, with a 15-watt TDP compared to the AMD part’s 28 watts. For systems with strict thermal or power budgets, this is a meaningful advantage. Its DDR4 memory support offers flexibility for platforms that do not require DDR5.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 wins on specifications alone. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock exceeds the Intel part’s 4.60 GHz, suggesting potential single-thread speed. Its 20 threads double the Intel part’s thread count in some configurations, which could benefit heavily parallel workloads if the architecture scales accordingly. The 16 MB L3 cache is 33% larger than the Intel part’s 12 MB, potentially improving cache-sensitive tasks.

The AMD part also supports LPDDR5X memory and ECC, catering to embedded or reliability-focused applications. Its 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes double the Intel part’s 8 lanes, which matters for systems with multiple high-speed devices. The 4 nm process node from TSMC indicates a more advanced manufacturing technology than Intel’s 10 nm, which could influence power and thermal behavior.

The mobile market segment for AMD versus desktop for Intel suggests different deployment targets. The AMD part’s 28-watt TDP and mobile designation point toward compact or portable systems, while the Intel part’s desktop segment aligns with traditional form factors. Without benchmarks, the AMD part’s wins remain theoretical, based on specification advantages that have not been verified in the database. For any workload requiring proven performance, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only supported choice.