AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core 7 150HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is extensive, while the Intel Core 7 150HL currently has no benchmark entries in the database. This creates a one-sided comparison for most metrics. The AMD part holds an average benchmark score of 62,839, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 150HL, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, meaning its performance profile is entirely unmeasured in our database.

Because the Intel Core 7 150HL has no recorded scores, the head-to-head comparison relies on the AMD part's individual benchmark results. The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 delivers strong multi-threaded performance with a Passmark multithread score of 31,817. Its single-thread score is 3,977, which reflects a competitive boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Integer math processing reaches 117,832, while floating-point math scores 70,587. Data compression workloads yield a score of 374,429, and data encryption completes at 19,612. Extended instruction workloads score 26,544, and random string sorting reaches 40,557. The physics test records 1,772, and the prime number search test scores 129.

Relative performance data from the nearest rivals provides context for the AMD part. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has an average score of 62,738, which is 0.2% lower than the Ryzen AI Embedded P185. The Intel Core i7-13790F scores 63,080, putting it 0.4% higher than the AMD chip. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX records 63,173, or 0.5% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 scores 62,498, which is 0.5% lower. These narrow margins indicate that the Ryzen AI Embedded P185 sits in a tightly contested performance band, trading places with immediate rivals by less than a single percentage point in either direction.

The Intel Core 7 150HL has no recorded scores and no rival data, so its performance cannot be positioned against the AMD part directly. The database shows no head-to-head benchmark results between the two processors. The Intel part's 50th percentile ranking is a default placement, not a measured outcome, given the absence of benchmark entries.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for users who rely on measured performance: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is the only one of the two with any recorded benchmark results. Its 93rd percentile standing, combined with an average score of 62,839, indicates a processor that competes at the top tier of the database. The Intel Core 7 150HL has no scores, so any performance-based selection would favor the AMD part by default.

For workloads that stress multi-threaded throughput, the Ryzen AI Embedded P185's 31,817 multithread score and 24 threads give it a strong profile. Single-thread responsiveness is also solid, with a 3,977 score and a 5.10 GHz boost clock. The AMD part also supports ECC memory and offers 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, features that suit embedded and reliability-focused applications.

The Intel Core 7 150HL does have structural advantages in the specification sheet. It provides 14 cores and 20 threads, and its cache hierarchy includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache, which is larger than the AMD part's 16 MB L3. It also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which broadens platform flexibility. However, without benchmark data, these differences cannot be translated into measured performance outcomes.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is the validated performer. The Intel Core 7 150HL remains an unknown quantity in the database, so it cannot be recommended based on our measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design lineages. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². The Intel Core 7 150HL uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename and is built on the Raptor Lake architecture. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is substantial: the AMD part uses a 4 nm node, while the Intel part uses a 10 nm node.

Core configuration differs as well. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double thread count. The Intel part has 14 cores and 20 threads, which indicates a hybrid core arrangement typical of Raptor Lake designs, though the database does not specify the performance and efficiency core split. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: the AMD part has 1 MB per core, while the Intel part has 2 MB per core. The L3 cache also differs, with the AMD part offering 16 MB and the Intel part offering 24 MB shared.

Integrated graphics differ between the two. The AMD part uses the Radeon 890M, while the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The AMD part is classified as a mobile segment processor, while the Intel part is classified as desktop segment. Socket compatibility also differs: the AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, and the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700.

Memory support shows a split. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with dual-channel memory and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but the database does not record its memory bandwidth. ECC memory support is present on the AMD part but absent on the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has twice the CPU-attached PCIe lane count.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. Core count: the AMD part has 12 cores, the Intel part has 14. Thread count: the AMD part has 24 threads, the Intel part has 20. Base clock: the AMD part runs at 2.00 GHz, the Intel part at 2.40 GHz. Boost clock: the AMD part reaches 5.10 GHz, the Intel part reaches 5.00 GHz. TDP: the AMD part is rated at 28 W, the Intel part at 45 W.

Process node: the AMD part uses 4 nm, the Intel part uses 10 nm. Die size: the AMD part measures 233 mm², the Intel part has no recorded die size. L2 cache: the AMD part has 1 MB per core, the Intel part has 2 MB per core. L3 cache: the AMD part has 16 MB, the Intel part has 24 MB shared. Memory bandwidth: the AMD part records 89.6 GB/s, the Intel part has no recorded value. ECC memory: supported on the AMD part, not supported on the Intel part. PCIe lanes: the AMD part has 16 Gen 4 lanes, the Intel part has 8 Gen 4 lanes. Integrated graphics: the AMD part uses Radeon 890M, the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. Market segment: the AMD part is mobile, the Intel part is desktop. Release date: the AMD part was released on 2026-02-28, the Intel part on 2024-04-07. The AMD part has a recorded TDP of 28 W versus 45 W for the Intel part, a difference that matters for thermal and power-constrained designs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL has 14 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has 12 cores.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core 7 150HL's 5.00 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 150HL support ECC memory?

A: No, the database records no ECC memory support for the Intel Core 7 150HL. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has an average benchmark score of 62,839 and ranks in the 93rd percentile. The Intel Core 7 150HL has an average benchmark score of 0 and no recorded benchmark entries.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has an average score of 62,738, which is 0.2% lower than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185's 62,839.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel Core 7 150HL supports DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses.