AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core 3 N355 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive outcome: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins all 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 N355. The largest margin appears in the prime number test, where AMD leads by 377.8 percent (129 vs. 27). Extended instructions follow at 344.8 percent (26544 vs. 5968), while integer math shows a 247.6 percent gap (117832 vs. 33894). These are not close contests; the AMD part dominates every measured workload category.

Data compression results highlight the scale of the difference. AMD scores 374429 against Intel's 117435, a 218.8 percent advantage. Floating point math shows a 211 percent delta (70587 vs. 22695), and multithread performance lands at 212.7 percent (31817 vs. 10174). Even the smallest margin, single-thread at 84.7 percent (3977 vs. 2153), represents a substantial lead. The AMD processor is faster in every single metric recorded, with no exceptions.

Physics simulation follows the same pattern: 1772 vs. 625, a 183.5 percent delta. Random string sorting sits at 175.8 percent (40557 vs. 14706), while data encryption shows 141.5 percent (19612 vs. 8121). The consistency of these margins, ranging from roughly 85 percent to nearly 380 percent, suggests a fundamental performance gap rather than isolated workload favoritism. Across the board, the AMD chip delivers between roughly double and nearly five times the throughput of the Intel part in these tests.

When placed against its own nearest rivals, the AMD processor's average benchmark score of 62839 sits within 0.5 percent of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 (62498) and within 0.2 percent of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (62738). It trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX by 0.5 percent (63173) and the Intel Core i7-13790F by 0.4 percent (63080). The Intel Core 3 N355, by contrast, averages 13492, matching the Intel Core i3-12100F exactly (13494, 0 percent delta) and sitting 0.3 percent above the Intel Core i5-9500 (13452). The Intel Core 5 120UL is 0.8 percent higher (13594), and the Intel Core i7-1250U is 1.1 percent lower (13351). The AMD part's average score is roughly 4.7 times that of the Intel part, a gap that aligns with the individual benchmark deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins every measured category, so the use-case split is straightforward: AMD for all workloads represented in the database. The largest advantages come in integer-heavy and extended instruction tasks, where the 247.6 percent and 344.8 percent deltas indicate strong arithmetic and vector processing capabilities. Prime number finding, a classic test of integer throughput, shows the biggest gap at 377.8 percent, suggesting the AMD architecture handles repetitive computation with far greater efficiency. For compression workloads, the 218.8 percent lead in data compression indicates strong memory and cache interplay, while encryption at 141.5 percent shows a solid but relatively smaller edge.

The Intel Core 3 N355 does not win any recorded benchmark, but its lower margins in certain tests reveal relative strengths. The smallest delta, single-thread at 84.7 percent, means the Intel part's per-core performance is its least disadvantaged area. Random string sorting at 175.8 percent and physics at 183.5 percent are also among the narrower gaps, suggesting memory access patterns and branch handling are less severe bottlenecks for Intel than pure computation. The Intel chip's average benchmark score of 13492 places it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD part sits in the 93rd percentile, so the database positions them in different performance tiers entirely.

For workloads that rely on multithread scaling, the AMD part's 24 threads versus 8 threads provides an obvious structural advantage. The 212.7 percent multithread delta confirms this. However, even in single-thread tests, where thread count does not matter, AMD leads by 84.7 percent, so Intel cannot claim efficiency superiority. The data indicates the Intel Core 3 N355 is best suited for scenarios where its lower power envelope (15 TDP vs. 28 TDP) and simpler platform requirements take priority, but no benchmark in the database rewards those traits. Every recorded performance metric favors AMD.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. AMD uses a 4 nm TSMC process node with the Gorgon Point codename and a Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel uses a 10 nm process from its own foundry, with the Twin Lake codename and a Core 3 generation based on Alder Lake-N. The process node gap alone, 4 nm vs. 10 nm, explains part of the power and efficiency difference, though the database does not include direct efficiency measurements.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning the Intel part lacks simultaneous multithreading. Base clocks are similar, 2.00 GHz for AMD and 1.90 GHz for Intel, but boost clocks differ substantially: 5.10 GHz for AMD versus 3.90 GHz for Intel. Cache hierarchies also differ. AMD uses 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. Intel uses 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD L3 cache is nearly three times larger, and its per-core L2 allocation scales with core count, whereas Intel's L2 is shared across all cores.

Memory support reflects different target tiers. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth and ECC support. Intel supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 but only in single-channel mode with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC. The memory bandwidth gap, 89.6 vs. 38.4 GB/s, is a 233 percent difference that likely contributes to the compression and sorting benchmark deltas. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well, with AMD using the Radeon 890M and Intel using UHD Graphics 770, though no graphics benchmarks are included in the database.

The sockets are incompatible, AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 1264. The AMD part measures 233 mm² of die size, while the database records no die size for Intel. Both processors are mobile market segments, both are active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part's release date is recorded as February 28, 2026, while Intel's is January 6, 2025, placing the AMD chip later in the product cycle.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 as the clear choice for any performance-oriented workload. Its average benchmark score of 62839 versus 13492, combined with wins in all 11 head-to-head tests, leaves no ambiguity. The AMD part's 93rd percentile ranking versus Intel's 68th percentile reinforces this, as does its proximity to much higher-tier rivals like the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (0.2 percent delta) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 (0.5 percent delta). The Intel Core 3 N355, by contrast, aligns with desktop parts from several generations ago, matching the Intel Core i3-12100F exactly and the Intel Core i5-9500 within 0.3 percent.

For users who prioritize multithread throughput, the AMD part's 24 threads and 16 MB L3 cache deliver a 212.7 percent multithread advantage. For single-thread responsiveness, the 84.7 percent lead still favors AMD. For memory-intensive tasks, the dual-channel 89.6 GB/s configuration crushes Intel's single-channel 38.4 GB/s. The only conceivable reason to select the Intel part from this data would be its lower 15 TDP and simpler platform, but no benchmark in the database measures power efficiency or platform cost. On raw performance, the AMD processor wins every recorded metric.

The nearest rival comparison adds context. The AMD part's score is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (0.2 percent delta), meaning it competes with Intel's high-end mobile parts despite its embedded positioning. The Intel Core 3 N355, however, sits in a far lower tier, matching budget desktop parts from earlier generations. This is not a close matchup; it is a difference of performance classes.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins all 11 recorded head-to-head benchmarks against the Intel Core 3 N355, with zero wins for Intel.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where AMD leads by 377.8 percent (129 vs. 27).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: AMD has an average benchmark score of 62839, while Intel has 13492. AMD's score is roughly 4.7 times higher.

Q: What is the smallest performance gap?

A: The smallest gap is in passmark_single_thread (and passmark_singlethread), where AMD leads by 84.7 percent (3977 vs. 2153).

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode with ECC, while Intel supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 in single-channel mode without ECC.

Q: How do their percentile rankings differ?

A: AMD ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while Intel ranks in the 68th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 | Intel Core 3 N355 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 28 | 15 |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Twin Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 233 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (shared) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 9 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 890M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Release Date | 2026-02-28 | 2025-01-06 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Part Number | Unknown | SRPNT |