AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 vs Intel Core i5-14400T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits cleanly by workload type and platform intent. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is a mobile-class processor built around the Zen 5 and Zen 5c hybrid core design, while the Intel Core i5-14400T is a desktop part from the Raptor Lake Refresh family. The benchmark database contains no scores for the AMD part, which means every measured performance figure in this comparison comes from the Intel side. That absence is itself informative: the Intel Core i5-14400T has an average benchmark score of 27166 and sits at the 79th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD part has a recorded percentile of 50 with no average score.

The Intel Core i5-14400T wins on every benchmark category where data exists, simply because no competing AMD scores are recorded. Its strongest showings appear in multi-threaded and sustained workloads. Cinebench R23 multicore delivers 17189 points, which places the processor near the top of its class. The PassMark multithread score of 20223 reinforces that pattern. For single-threaded work, the Intel chip records a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2426 and a PassMark single-thread score of 3512. These numbers indicate a balanced part that handles both lightly threaded and heavily threaded applications without a dramatic swing in efficiency.

The absence of AMD benchmark data does not mean the Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is uncompetitive on paper. Its specifications suggest a different design philosophy. With 10 cores and 20 threads, the AMD part matches the Intel chip in core count but doubles the thread count. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz exceeds the Intel part's 4.50 GHz boost. The AMD processor also uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while Intel relies on a 10 nm node from its own foundry. These architectural differences imply that the AMD part could outperform in specific scenarios, particularly those that scale with thread count or benefit from a denser manufacturing process. However, without recorded benchmark scores, any such conclusion remains speculative rather than data-backed.

The database shows the Intel Core i5-14400T competing closely with several established processors. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9900K with an average score of 27097 and a delta of 0.3 percent, the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G at 27051 with a delta of 0.4 percent, the Intel Core i7-13700H at 27355 with a delta of -0.7 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G at 27382 with a delta of -0.8 percent. These deltas are small, meaning the Intel part sits right in the middle of a tight performance cluster. It is neither a standout nor a laggard among its immediate peers.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their underlying designs. 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 is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core i5-14400T uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 215 mm². The AMD part is smaller in process geometry but larger in physical die area, which reflects a more complex integrated design.

Core organization differs as well. Both processors have 10 physical cores, but the AMD part supports 20 threads through simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part supports only 16 threads. The Intel chip uses a hybrid configuration of performance cores and efficient cores, which is standard for Raptor Lake, though the database does not specify the exact core split. The AMD part uses a combination of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, where the "c" designation typically indicates a more compact core variant designed for power efficiency. This hybrid approach allows the AMD processor to balance high single-thread performance with dense multi-thread throughput.

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache is 1 MB per core on the AMD side and 1.25 MB per core on the Intel side. The L3 cache shows a larger gap: the AMD part provides 16 MB total, while the Intel part offers 20 MB shared. This gives Intel a 25 percent advantage in last-level cache capacity, which can benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache. The AMD part compensates with a higher boost clock and more threads, but the cache deficit remains a measurable architectural difference.

Memory support adds another layer of divergence. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-14400T supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also over a dual-channel bus, but the database does not record a bandwidth figure for it. The AMD part's memory bandwidth specification is explicit and high, suggesting it is optimized for embedded and mobile workloads that demand fast data movement. Both processors support ECC memory, which is notable for embedded and workstation applications. PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Intel's newer PCIe generation provides higher potential bandwidth for expansion devices, but the AMD part's Gen 4 implementation may be sufficient for its target market.

Integrated graphics also separate the two. The AMD part includes a Radeon 880M GPU, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 730. The database does not provide benchmark scores for either GPU, so direct comparison is not possible from the recorded data. The Radeon 880M is a modern integrated solution, and UHD Graphics 730 is a basic desktop iGPU. The AMD part is classified as a mobile component with a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part is a desktop component with a 35 W TDP. The lower TDP on the AMD side suggests better power efficiency per watt, though the Intel part has a higher thermal budget for sustained operation.

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 i5-14400T boosts to 4.50 GHz. The AMD part holds a 0.50 GHz advantage in maximum frequency.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both chips have 10 physical cores. The AMD part supports 20 threads, while the Intel part supports 16 threads. This gives AMD a 4-thread advantage in simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400T has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 16 MB. Intel leads by 4 MB.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, and both support ECC memory.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i5-14400T uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The AMD node is denser, which can improve power efficiency and transistor density.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the Intel Core i5-14400T in the database?

A: The nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-9900K with a delta of 0.3 percent, the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G with a delta of 0.4 percent, the Intel Core i7-13700H with a delta of -0.7 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G with a delta of -0.8 percent.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. 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 i5-14400T has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. AMD leads by 0.50 GHz in both base and boost frequencies. The TDP rating favors AMD as well: the Ryzen AI part draws 28 W, while the Intel part draws 35 W. That 7 W difference indicates the AMD processor is designed for more thermally constrained environments.

The socket and platform targets are entirely different. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, which is a mobile socket, and is classified in the mobile market segment. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket, and is classified in the desktop market segment. This fundamental platform split dictates the use cases: the AMD part belongs in embedded or mobile systems, while the Intel part belongs in desktop builds. The release dates also differ. The AMD part was released on 2026-02-28, while the Intel part was released on 2024-01-07. The AMD part is nearly two years newer in the database timeline.

Process technology separates the two by a wide margin. AMD uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while Intel uses a 10 nm process at its own foundry. Die sizes are close: AMD measures 233 mm², Intel measures 215 mm². The AMD die is 18 mm² larger despite the denser process, which likely reflects the integrated Radeon 880M GPU and the embedded-focused design. The Intel part carries a smaller die with a more basic UHD Graphics 730.

Cache specifications show a mixed picture. Both parts use 80 KB of L1 per core. The L2 cache is 1 MB per core on AMD and 1.25 MB per core on Intel, giving Intel a 25 percent per-core advantage in L2. The L3 cache is 16 MB on AMD and 20 MB on Intel, giving Intel a 4 MB advantage in the shared pool. Memory support favors AMD in terms of bandwidth, with a recorded 89.6 GB/s figure, while Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but has no recorded bandwidth number. PCIe support favors Intel on generation, with Gen 5 versus AMD's Gen 4, though both provide 16 CPU lanes. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $221, and the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark section in the database is empty, meaning there are no directly paired test results between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 and the Intel Core i5-14400T. The only benchmark data belongs to the Intel processor. This makes a true side-by-side numerical comparison impossible from the recorded facts. What can be analyzed is the Intel part's absolute performance and its standing relative to its nearest rivals.

The Intel Core i5-14400T records its highest multicore result in Cinebench R23 multicore with a score of 17189. The Cinebench R20 multicore score is 7219, and the Cinebench R15 multicore score is 1732. These three results show a consistent scaling pattern across Cinebench versions, with each newer version producing higher absolute scores due to workload changes. The single-core results follow a similar trend: Cinebench R23 single-core scores 2426, Cinebench R20 single-core scores 1018, and Cinebench R15 single-core scores 244. The ratio between multicore and single-core scores in R23 is roughly 7.1, which indicates strong multi-thread scaling given the 10 cores and 16 threads.

PassMark results add another dimension. The multithread score is 20223, and the single-thread score is 3512. The integer math score is 65667, while the floating point math score is 49139. Data compression scores 235636, data encryption scores 13244, and extended instructions score 14562. Random string sorting produces 25181, and find prime numbers produces 73. Physics scores 1244. These PassMark results show the Intel part handles integer-heavy workloads better than floating point, with integer math outperforming floating point by roughly 34 percent. The data compression score is particularly high, indicating strong performance in file compression and decompression tasks. The find prime numbers score of 73 is the lowest recorded value, which suggests this workload is not a strong suit for the architecture.

The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 27166, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 79. That means it outperforms roughly 79 percent of all processors in the database. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-9900K, scores 27097, which is just 0.3 percent lower. The AMD Ryzen 7 5700G scores 27051, 0.4 percent lower. The Intel Core i7-13700H scores 27355, 0.7 percent higher, and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G scores 27382, 0.8 percent higher. These deltas are all under 1 percent, placing the Intel Core i5-14400T in a tightly contested performance band where small architectural differences determine slight wins or losses.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its performance cannot be ranked against the Intel part or any other CPU. Its specification sheet suggests it could be competitive in multi-threaded workloads due to the 20-thread count and 5.00 GHz boost clock, but the database does not provide confirmation. The Intel part's recorded data shows a well-rounded desktop processor with strong multicore performance, solid single-core capability, and close competition with several older and newer chips. The AMD part remains an unmeasured quantity in this comparison, and any performance claim about it would rely on specification analysis rather than recorded results.