AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core 3 N350 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents an unambiguous performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins 11 of 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with no wins recorded for the Intel Core 3 N350. The AMD part sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs tested, while the Intel part sits in the 66th percentile. The average benchmark score for the AMD chip is 62,839, versus 9,903 for the Intel chip, a gap of roughly six and a half times.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is the clear choice for workloads that demand heavy compute, particularly multi-threaded tasks, data compression, encryption, and extended instruction sets. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (average score 62,738, delta 0.2%), the Intel Core i7-13790F (average score 63,080, delta -0.4%), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX (average score 63,173, delta -0.5%). These margins are small, but they place the AMD part in company with high-end desktop and mobile processors.

The Intel Core 3 N350 is a low-power part with a 7 W TDP, and its benchmark positioning reflects that. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-3770 (average score 9,706, delta 2%), the Intel Core i5-1035G1 (average score 9,684, delta 2.3%), the AMD EPYC 7F52 (average score 10,159, delta -2.5%), and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 (average score 10,230, delta -3.2%). This places the N350 in the range of older desktop processors and low-voltage mobile chips, not modern high-core-count parts.

For buyers who need sustained throughput, the AMD part is the only rational pick from this data. For buyers who prioritize power efficiency and light workloads, the Intel part has a role, but the benchmark evidence shows it will trail the AMD chip severely in every measured category.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has an average benchmark score of 62,839, while the Intel Core 3 N350 has an average score of 9,903.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: In the PassMark single-thread test, the AMD part scores 3,977 versus 1,974 for the Intel part, a delta of 101.5%.

Q: What is the difference in multi-threaded performance?

A: The PassMark multi-thread score for the AMD part is 31,817, versus 7,382 for the Intel part, a delta of 331%.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has ECC memory support enabled, while the Intel Core 3 N350 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each part?

A: The AMD part has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s with dual-channel memory support. The Intel part has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s with single-channel memory support.

Q: How do the processors compare in data compression and encryption?

A: In data compression, the AMD part scores 374,429 versus 80,444 for the Intel part, a delta of 365.5%. In data encryption, the AMD part scores 19,612 versus 5,693, a delta of 244.5%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing nodes. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 / Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 3 N350 uses the Twin Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation based on Alder Lake-N architecture. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 8 cores and 8 threads. The AMD part does not have simultaneous multi-threading disabled; it doubles thread count over core count. The Intel part has a 1:1 thread to core ratio.

Cache layouts also differ. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD L2 is per-core, while the Intel L2 is shared across cores.

Die size data is only available for the AMD part, which measures 233 mm². The Intel part has no recorded die size. Transistor counts are not recorded for either part.

Memory support diverges as well. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but only on a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part only.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part offers PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics also differ. The AMD part uses a Radeon 890M. The Intel part uses UHD Graphics 770.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification field recorded in the database.

• Cores: AMD 12, Intel 8
• Threads: AMD 24, Intel 8
• Base clock: AMD 2.00 GHz, Intel 0.10 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD 5.10 GHz, Intel 3.90 GHz
• TDP: AMD 28 W, Intel 7 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8, Intel BGA 1264
• Process node: AMD 4 nm (TSMC), Intel 10 nm (Intel)
• L1 cache: AMD 80 KB per core, Intel 96 KB per core
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 2 MB shared
• L3 cache: AMD 16 MB, Intel 6 MB shared
• Memory support: AMD DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5
• Memory bus: AMD dual-channel, Intel single-channel
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 89.6 GB/s, Intel 38.4 GB/s
• ECC memory: AMD true, Intel false
• PCIe: AMD Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel Gen 3 with 9 lanes
• Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 890M, Intel UHD Graphics 770
• Release date: AMD 2026-02-28, Intel 2025-01-06
• Part number: Intel recorded as SRPNS, AMD recorded as unknown

These differences explain the benchmark gap. The AMD part has more cores, more threads, higher clocks, more cache, a wider memory bus, and a newer process node. The Intel part counters with a much lower TDP, which suits passive cooling and battery-focused designs, but the performance cost is severe.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a complete sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185. All 11 recorded tests favor the AMD part, with deltas ranging from 101.5% to 566.8%.

The largest margin appears in extended instruction testing. The AMD part scores 26,544 versus 3,981 for the Intel part, a delta of 566.8%. This suggests a dramatic advantage in workloads that use advanced SIMD or specialized instruction sets.

Prime number finding shows the second largest gap. The AMD part scores 129 versus 20 for the Intel part, a delta of 545%. This test often reflects raw integer throughput and branch handling, where the Zen 5 architecture holds a decisive edge.

Data compression favors AMD by 365.5%, with scores of 374,429 versus 80,444. This test is sensitive to memory bandwidth and cache behavior, both of which favor the AMD part given its dual-channel bus and larger L3 cache.

Multi-thread performance shows a delta of 331%, with the AMD part scoring 31,817 versus 7,382. This result aligns with the core and thread count differences: 12 cores with 24 threads versus 8 cores with 8 threads.

Integer math favors AMD by 325.9%, with scores of 117,832 versus 27,669. Floating point math favors AMD by 297%, with scores of 70,587 versus 17,781. Random string sorting favors AMD by 301.5%, with scores of 40,557 versus 10,102. Physics testing favors AMD by 297.3%, with scores of 1,772 versus 446.

Data encryption shows a delta of 244.5%, with the AMD part scoring 19,612 versus 5,693. This test often benefits from AES-NI and other hardware acceleration, where the AMD implementation appears substantially faster.

The smallest margin is in single-thread performance, but it still favors AMD by 101.5%. The AMD part scores 3,977 versus 1,974 for the Intel part. This means the AMD chip is roughly twice as fast in single-threaded work, despite the Intel part having a lower base clock and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus 5.10 GHz for AMD.

The benchmark data shows no category where the Intel Core 3 N350 leads. The Intel part's only advantage is its 7 W TDP, which is not reflected in any performance metric. The AMD part's 28 W TDP is four times higher, but the performance deltas range from roughly 2x to nearly 7x, making the power efficiency per unit of work heavily favor AMD in most scenarios.

The percentile placement reinforces this. The AMD part is in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part is in the 66th percentile. The average benchmark score difference of 52,936 points places these chips in entirely different performance classes.