AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 vs Intel Core i5-110 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 and Intel Core i5-110 occupy different positions in the processor landscape, with the former targeting mobile embedded workloads and the latter serving desktop systems. The recorded database metrics show no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two parts, as the head-to-head array is empty and neither processor has individual benchmark entries. What the database does provide is a detailed specification profile for each, allowing a structural comparison based on cores, clocks, cache, memory support, and platform characteristics. The percentile ranking for both CPUs against all processors in the database is identical at 50, placing them at the median of the recorded field. This parity in overall standing, despite their divergent architectures and market segments, forms the basis for the analysis below.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 or the Intel Core i5-110. Neither processor has entries in the benchmark array, and the head-to-head results list is empty. Consequently, no numerical performance comparisons can be drawn from actual test runs. The wins counter for each processor remains at zero, reflecting the absence of recorded victories in any workload category.

Without measured performance data, the only quantitative basis for comparison lies in the specification fields. The AMD part offers 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel part provides 6 cores and 12 threads. The AMD processor has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel processor starts at 2.90 GHz base and reaches 4.30 GHz boost. These clock figures suggest that the Intel part has a higher base frequency, but the AMD part boasts a substantially higher maximum boost. The gap in boost clock is 0.70 GHz in favor of AMD, while the base clock advantage for Intel is 0.90 GHz.

Thread count differences are stark. The AMD processor supports twice as many threads as the Intel part, with 20 versus 12. This indicates that the AMD design can handle more concurrent software threads, which typically benefits heavily parallel workloads. However, without actual benchmark results, the database cannot confirm how these thread advantages translate into real-world scores. The empty benchmark fields mean that all performance statements must remain speculative, grounded only in the architectural parameters provided.

The average benchmark score for both processors is recorded as zero, reinforcing that no testing data exists in the database for these units. The percentile ranking of 50 for both indicates they sit at the midpoint of all CPUs tracked, but this percentile is not derived from their own benchmark runs. It likely reflects a categorical placement rather than empirical results. For any user consulting the database, the clear conclusion is that performance comparisons between these two processors cannot be made from measured data at this time.

Where Each One Wins

Given the absence of benchmark results, the analysis shifts to specification-driven advantages. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 wins on raw thread count, offering 20 threads against the Intel part’s 12. This gives it a clear edge in multi-threaded scenarios such as server-style virtualization, content rendering, and compilation tasks, assuming software can utilize the additional threads. The AMD boost clock of 5.00 GHz also exceeds the Intel boost of 4.30 GHz, suggesting superior single-thread burst performance in short, latency-sensitive operations.

The AMD processor also supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel part is limited to DDR4. The memory bandwidth figures reflect this: AMD records 89.6 GB/s, while Intel records 42.7 GB/s. That is more than double the bandwidth for the AMD part, which can benefit memory-intensive applications like data analytics, scientific computing, and large in-memory databases. The AMD processor also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel part, making it suitable for error-sensitive workloads in embedded or server environments.

The Intel Core i5-110 wins on base clock, with 2.90 GHz versus 2.00 GHz for AMD. For sustained workloads that do not boost to peak frequencies, the Intel part may sustain higher baseline throughput. The Intel processor also has a higher TDP at 65 watts compared to 28 watts for AMD. This higher power envelope allows the Intel chip to run at its base clock with less thermal constraint, though it also means greater power consumption and heat generation. The Intel part targets desktop systems with Socket 1200, while AMD uses Socket FP8 for mobile embedded applications, so the Intel chip fits into traditional desktop motherboards with larger cooling solutions.

In terms of cache, the AMD processor provides 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, totaling 10 MB L2 across all cores. The Intel part has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, totaling 1.5 MB L2 across six cores. AMD’s L3 cache is 16 MB, while Intel’s is 12 MB shared. The AMD part has a larger cache hierarchy overall, which can reduce memory latency and improve hit rates for frequently accessed data. The Intel part’s smaller L2 cache may lead to more frequent main memory accesses, though its DDR4 bandwidth is lower anyway.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing nodes and foundries. AMD uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while Intel uses a 14 nm process at Intel’s own fabs. The 4 nm node is significantly more advanced, allowing higher transistor density and lower power consumption per transistor. This explains the AMD part’s lower TDP of 28 watts despite having more cores and a higher boost clock. The Intel 14 nm node is older and less efficient, requiring 65 watts for six cores.

The AMD processor is codenamed Gorgon Point and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel part is codenamed Comet Lake, part of the Core i5 generation. Zen 5 and Zen 5c represent a hybrid design, likely combining high-performance and high-efficiency core types. The Intel Comet Lake architecture is a monolithic design from Intel’s 14 nm era, offering uniform cores across the six-core layout.

The AMD die size is 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded. The AMD processor integrates Radeon 880M graphics, while the Intel part has UHD Graphics 630. The AMD integrated GPU is from a newer Radeon lineup, likely offering more compute units and better media capabilities, though the database does not specify shader counts or clock speeds for either. The Intel UHD Graphics 630 is a known entry-level iGPU from the Comet Lake era.

PCIe support differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Gen 4 doubles the per-lane bandwidth of Gen 3, so the AMD part can move data between CPU and peripherals faster. This matters for NVMe storage and high-bandwidth add-in cards. The Intel part’s Gen 3 support is adequate for older devices but limits peak throughput.

Memory support further separates them. AMD accepts DDR5 and LPDDR5X, both modern memory types with higher bandwidth and lower latency compared to DDR4. The Intel part only accepts DDR4, which caps bandwidth at the recorded 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on AMD but not on Intel, so the AMD part can operate in environments requiring error correction, such as financial modeling or scientific research.

The release dates show the AMD part launched on 2026-02-28, while the Intel part launched on 2025-09-10. The AMD part is newer, which aligns with its more advanced process node and memory support. The Intel part, despite a later production status of Active, is based on an older architecture from 2020 in real-world terms, though the database lists no year for its design.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 10 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core i5-110 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The AMD part offers 4 additional cores and 8 additional threads.

Q: What is the maximum boost clock for each processor?

A: The AMD processor reaches 5.00 GHz boost, while the Intel processor reaches 4.30 GHz boost. The AMD part has a 0.70 GHz higher boost ceiling.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD processor has ECC memory support enabled, while the Intel processor does not support ECC memory.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel processor supports DDR4 only. The AMD part also records 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 42.7 GB/s for Intel.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The AMD processor uses a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel processor uses a 14 nm process at Intel. The 4 nm node is smaller and more advanced.

Q: What are the TDP values for the two processors?

A: The AMD processor has a TDP of 28 watts. The Intel processor has a TDP of 65 watts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification field. Core count: AMD has 10, Intel has 6. Thread count: AMD has 20, Intel has 12. Base clock: AMD is 2.00 GHz, Intel is 2.90 GHz. Boost clock: AMD is 5.00 GHz, Intel is 4.30 GHz. TDP: AMD is 28 watts, Intel is 65 watts. Socket: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, Intel uses Intel Socket 1200.

Process node: AMD is 4 nm, Intel is 14 nm. Foundry: AMD uses TSMC, Intel uses Intel. Die size: AMD is 233 mm², Intel has no recorded die size. L1 cache: AMD has 80 KB per core, Intel has 64 KB per core. L2 cache: AMD has 1 MB per core, Intel has 256 KB per core. L3 cache: AMD has 16 MB, Intel has 12 MB shared.

Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4. Memory bandwidth: AMD records 89.6 GB/s, Intel records 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory: AMD supports it, Intel does not. PCIe: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics: AMD has Radeon 880M, Intel has UHD Graphics 630.

Market segment: AMD is Mobile, Intel is Desktop. Release date: AMD is 2026-02-28, Intel is 2025-09-10. Launch MSRP: Intel is listed at $200, AMD has no launch MSRP recorded. Part number: Intel is SA35X, AMD is unknown. Generation: AMD is Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), Intel is Core i5 (Comet Lake). Codename: AMD is Gorgon Point, Intel is Comet Lake.

The Verdict

The database provides no benchmark scores for either processor, so any selection must rely on the recorded specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 offers a higher core count, more threads, a higher boost clock, larger caches, faster memory support, ECC capability, and a smaller process node. It also draws less power at 28 watts, making it suited for mobile embedded systems where thermal and power budgets are constrained. The Intel Core i5-110 offers a higher base clock and a desktop form factor with Socket 1200, which fits traditional desktop motherboards. Its 65 watt TDP allows for less aggressive power limiting, but it comes with older DDR4 memory and Gen 3 PCIe.

The data indicates that for multi-threaded, memory-heavy, or error-sensitive workloads, the AMD part has structural advantages. For basic desktop use with a preference for higher base frequency and established desktop platform compatibility, the Intel part may suffice. The AMD processor’s newer release date and advanced node suggest longer platform relevance, while the Intel part’s $200 launch MSRP indicates a lower entry cost, though the database does not support price-based comparisons beyond that single figure. The verdict from the recorded data: choose AMD for embedded, mobile, or high-thread-count scenarios; choose Intel for straightforward desktop builds where base clock and Socket 1200 compatibility matter. Neither processor has benchmark evidence to override these specification-driven conclusions.