AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 vs Intel Core 7 251E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not include any head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 and the Intel Core 7 251E. There are no recorded direct comparison scores, no win counts, and no percentile deltas between the two processors. The `headToHeadBenchmarks` list is empty, and both entries show an identical `percentileVsAllCpus` of 50, placing them at the median of all CPUs in the database. Without measured performance data, any direct numeric comparison between these two parts is impossible from the recorded information. The `winsA` and `winsB` fields are both set to zero, confirming that neither processor has any documented benchmark victories over the other.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design approaches despite sharing some surface-level specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is built on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Core 7 251E uses Intel's 10 nm process. This process gap is significant, as the AMD part integrates more transistors per area, though the database does not record transistor counts for either chip. The die sizes differ modestly: the AMD processor measures 233 mm², while the Intel processor is slightly larger at 257 mm².

The core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses 10 cores and 20 threads, based on the Zen 5 and Zen 5c architecture under the Gorgon Point codename. The Intel Core 7 251E uses 24 cores and 32 threads under the Bartlett Lake codename. The Intel part therefore offers 14 more cores and 12 more threads, but the AMD part does not disclose its core type breakdown in the database, so a direct performance-per-core comparison cannot be made. The generation fields confirm the design split: AMD lists "Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c)", while Intel lists "Core 7 (Bartlett Lake)".

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both processors allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 allocation is 1 MB per core on the AMD chip and 2 MB per core on the Intel chip. The L3 cache is a major differentiator: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 16 MB of L3, while the Intel Core 7 251E has 36 MB of shared L3. That 20 MB difference in last-level cache gives the Intel part a substantial capacity advantage for workloads that reuse large working sets. The per-core L2 doubling on Intel also suggests different latency and throughput characteristics for frequently accessed data.

Memory support is another differentiation point. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD part's LPDDR5X support targets low-power mobile and embedded scenarios, whereas the Intel part's DDR4 compatibility extends its reach into existing desktop platforms. Both processors use a dual-channel memory bus, and both deliver the same peak memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both also support ECC memory, which matters for reliability-sensitive workloads.

PCI Express capabilities differ by generation. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core 7 251E uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part's Gen 5 interface doubles the per-lane bandwidth available to the AMD part, which can matter for high-throughput storage and accelerator connectivity.

The integrated graphics solutions are entirely different. AMD pairs the processor with the Radeon 880M, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. The database records no benchmark scores for either iGPU, so relative graphics performance cannot be quantified. The market segments also differ: the AMD part is classified as Mobile, while the Intel part is classified as Desktop. This classification aligns with the socket choices: AMD uses Socket FP8, an embedded mobile platform, while Intel uses Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The release dates differ by over a year, with the Intel part appearing on 2025-01-12 and the AMD part following on 2026-02-28.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 10 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 16 MB of L3 cache. Intel's part provides 20 MB more L3 capacity.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 and the Intel Core 7 251E have ECC memory support enabled in the database.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses and record the same 89.6 GB/s peak memory bandwidth.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. The Intel Core 7 251E is fabricated on a 10 nm Intel process.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, compared to the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174's boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel part also has a slightly higher base clock at 2.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 | Intel Core 7 251E |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 10 | 24 |

| Threads | 20 | 32 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core 7 (Bartlett Lake) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die size | 233 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 880M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-02-28 | 2025-01-12 |

| Part number | unknown | SRQDUQ657 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $384 |

The TDP difference is notable: the AMD part draws 28 W, while the Intel part draws 65 W. That 37 W gap reflects the mobile versus desktop positioning. The base clock advantage sits with Intel at 2.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and the boost clock advantage also sits with Intel at 5.60 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. The Intel part is unlocked in neither case, as both processors have `multiplierUnlocked` set to false. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, while the Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $384. The Intel part is the only one with a recorded part number, SRQDUQ657. Both processors share the same dual-channel memory bus, the same 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, the same ECC support, the same 80 KB per-core L1 cache, and the same production status of Active.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 251E wins on raw core and thread count. With 24 cores and 32 threads, it offers 14 more cores and 12 more threads than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174. That advantage is compounded by a 36 MB shared L3 cache, which is 20 MB larger than the AMD part's 16 MB. The Intel part also operates at a higher base clock (2.10 GHz versus 2.00 GHz) and a higher boost clock (5.60 GHz versus 5.00 GHz). The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes gives Intel a bandwidth advantage for expansion devices. The smaller 10 nm process node is a disadvantage in density, but the overall package targets desktop platforms where power limits are less constrained. The 65 W TDP reflects that desktop orientation. The Intel part also supports DDR4 memory, which can be relevant for platforms that reuse existing memory inventory.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 wins on power efficiency and process technology. The 28 W TDP is less than half of the Intel part's 65 W envelope. The 4 nm TSMC process is smaller than Intel's 10 nm node, and the die size is 24 mm² smaller. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory, which is absent from the Intel part's memory support list. That LPDDR5X support pairs with the Mobile market segment classification and the Socket FP8 platform. The Radeon 880M integrated graphics may offer a different feature set than Intel's UHD Graphics 770, though no benchmark data exists in the database to quantify the difference. For embedded and mobile workloads where power draw and platform size dominate, the AMD part's 28 W envelope and LPDDR5X support give it a structural advantage.

Neither processor has recorded benchmark scores, so the database cannot confirm performance wins in any specific application category. The specification data indicates that Intel's part is positioned for desktop workloads that scale with core count and cache capacity, while AMD's part is positioned for mobile and embedded deployments that prioritize power efficiency and integration. The 50th percentile ranking for both parts in the overall CPU distribution places them at the median of all recorded processors, but that ranking does not carry any comparative weight between the two, since neither has an average benchmark score recorded. The lack of head-to-head results means all conclusions in this section are based on architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance.