AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a dominant performance profile for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 across every single benchmark category measured. The head-to-head comparison yields 11 wins for the AMD part and zero for the Intel Core 7 240H. This is not a marginal victory; the margin is substantial in several key workloads.

The largest gap appears in extended instructions, where the AMD processor scores 26544 against Intel's 16897, a 57.1% advantage. This test typically measures specialized instruction throughput, and the data indicates the AMD implementation delivers significantly higher efficiency in this area. Integer math follows closely behind, with AMD scoring 117832 versus 80396, a 46.6% lead. These two results alone suggest the AMD architecture has a meaningful throughput advantage for compute-heavy integer workloads.

Data compression shows AMD at 374429 versus Intel's 271774, a 37.8% delta. Random string sorting, another memory-intensive workload, shows AMD ahead by 40.5% with scores of 40557 and 28866 respectively. Multithread performance, which reflects the overall parallel processing capability, shows AMD scoring 31817 against Intel's 23975, a 32.7% lead. Data encryption shows a 29.4% advantage for AMD, with scores of 19612 and 15155.

The floating-point math test shows a narrower but still clear margin: AMD scores 70587 versus Intel's 58905, a 19.8% difference. Prime number finding, a test sensitive to algorithmic efficiency, shows AMD ahead by 26.5% with scores of 129 and 102. Physics simulation shows the smallest gap in the entire comparison, with AMD at 1772 and Intel at 1723, a 2.8% difference. This near-parity indicates that in physics-based workloads, the two processors perform almost identically.

Single-thread performance, often a critical metric for responsive daily use, shows AMD ahead by 5.2% with scores of 3977 and 3782. While this is one of the smaller margins, it still favors the AMD processor in every single-threaded task measured. The consistency of AMD's advantage across both single-thread and multi-thread tests indicates a well-rounded performance profile rather than strength in only one workload class.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. AMD's average sits at 62839, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. Intel's average is 31483, which places it in the 82nd percentile. The percentile gap, from 82 to 93, represents a significant overall standing difference. Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 at 31473 (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX at 31495 (0% delta), showing the Core 7 240H is squarely positioned in a mid-range performance tier. AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX at 62738 (0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i7-13790F at 63080 (-0.4% delta), placing it in a substantially higher performance bracket.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial and explains the benchmark results. AMD uses the Gorgon Point codename with a Zen 5 / Zen 5c generation design, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Intel uses the Raptor Lake-H codename with a Raptor Lake Refresh generation, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own fabs. The process node difference alone, 4 nm versus 10 nm, gives AMD a significant transistor density and power efficiency advantage.

Core counts differ meaningfully. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 10 cores and 16 threads. This 20% core advantage and 50% thread advantage for AMD directly contributes to its multi-thread benchmark lead. The cache hierarchy also differs. Both use 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but AMD uses 1 MB of L2 per core while Intel uses 2 MB per core. This means Intel has more L2 cache per core, which can benefit certain latency-sensitive workloads. However, AMD's L3 cache is 16 MB total, while Intel's L3 is 24 MB shared, giving Intel a larger last-level cache overall.

Memory support shows a clear differentiation. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel bus, but no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. AMD also includes ECC memory support, a feature absent from Intel. This positions the AMD processor for reliability-sensitive embedded and server-adjacent use cases.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD pairs with the Radeon 890M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 64 execution units. The Radeon 890M is a newer, higher-performance integrated solution, and the benchmark data shows AMD's overall processor performance advantage extends to the platform level. PCIe support also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. Intel's Gen 5 interface offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD's higher lane count provides more total connectivity options.

The Intel processor has a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz compared to AMD's 2.00 GHz, and a slightly higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus AMD's 5.10 GHz. Despite this clock advantage, the benchmark data shows AMD winning every test, indicating that architectural efficiency outweighs raw clock speed in these workloads. The power envelope also differs, with AMD rated at 28 W TDP and Intel at 45 W TDP. The lower TDP for AMD, combined with superior benchmark scores, indicates a significantly better performance-per-watt profile.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows no workload category where the Intel Core 7 240H outperforms the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185. Every recorded test, from data compression to physics simulation, favors AMD. This is an unusual outcome in processor comparisons, as most products show at least some workload-specific advantages.

For workloads involving data compression, encryption, extended instructions, integer math, floating-point math, multithread processing, random string sorting, prime number finding, and single-thread tasks, the AMD processor delivers higher scores. The margins range from 2.8% in physics to 57.1% in extended instructions. The AMD processor's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and 16 MB L3 cache contribute to its strong showing in memory-intensive tasks like random string sorting and data compression.

The Intel processor's closest performance comes in physics simulation, where the 2.8% delta indicates near-parity. This suggests that in physics-based workloads, the two processors are effectively interchangeable. The Intel part also holds advantages in specific specification areas: higher base and boost clocks, larger L2 cache per core, larger L3 cache, and Gen 5 PCIe support. These advantages, however, do not translate into any benchmark victory in the recorded data.

The AMD processor's 93rd percentile standing versus Intel's 82nd percentile confirms that the AMD part competes in a higher performance tier overall. The nearest rivals for AMD include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX and Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, both high-end parts. The nearest rivals for Intel include the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 and Intel Core Ultra 5 225H, which are mid-range parts. This positioning difference explains why the head-to-head results are so one-sided.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. Core count differs: AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, Intel has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clock differs: AMD runs at 2.00 GHz, Intel at 2.50 GHz. Boost clock differs slightly: AMD at 5.10 GHz, Intel at 5.20 GHz. TDP differs significantly: AMD at 28 W, Intel at 45 W.

Socket types are incompatible: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, Intel uses Intel BGA 1744. The architecture and codename differ completely, with AMD on Gorgon Point (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) and Intel on Raptor Lake-H (Raptor Lake Refresh). Process node differs: AMD at 4 nm from TSMC, Intel at 10 nm from Intel. Die size is recorded only for AMD at 233 mm²; no die size is recorded for Intel.

Cache configuration differs: both use 80 KB L1 per core, but AMD uses 1 MB L2 per core versus Intel's 2 MB per core. L3 cache differs: AMD has 16 MB total, Intel has 24 MB shared. Memory support differs: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for AMD at 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on AMD but absent on Intel.

PCIe capability differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, Intel provides Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 890M, Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 64EU. Release dates differ: AMD released on 2026-02-28, Intel on 2024-12-17. Intel has a recorded launch MSRP of $502; no launch MSRP is recorded for AMD. Both processors are in active production and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 31817 in PassMark multithread, while the Intel Core 7 240H scores 23975. AMD leads by 32.7% in this test.

Q: How do the single-thread scores compare?

A: AMD scores 3977 in PassMark single-thread, while Intel scores 3782. AMD holds a 5.2% advantage in single-thread performance.

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

A: The largest gap is in extended instructions, where AMD scores 26544 versus Intel's 16897, a 57.1% difference in AMD's favor.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 240H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these processors?

A: The AMD processor has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel processor has a TDP of 45 W.

Q: How do the overall standings compare in the database?

A: AMD ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 62839. Intel ranks in the 82nd percentile with an average score of 31483.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 outperforms the Intel Core 7 240H in every recorded benchmark. With 11 wins out of 11 head-to-head tests, the AMD processor delivers higher scores across data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread workloads.

The AMD processor's advantages are rooted in its architecture. The Zen 5 / Zen 5c design on a 4 nm TSMC process provides efficiency that the 10 nm Intel process cannot match. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration gives AMD a 20% core and 50% thread advantage. The lower TDP of 28 W versus 45 W means AMD achieves superior performance while drawing less power. The 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and ECC support further differentiate the platform for reliability-sensitive applications.

The Intel Core 7 240H maintains some specification advantages: higher base and boost clocks, larger L2 and L3 caches, Gen 5 PCIe support, and a release date roughly 14 months earlier. These features do not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data, but they indicate the Intel part may offer different platform capabilities, particularly for users requiring Gen 5 PCIe connectivity or DDR4 memory compatibility.

For users selecting between these two processors based solely on benchmark performance, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is the superior choice. Its 93rd percentile standing versus Intel's 82nd percentile, its consistent wins across all workload categories, and its lower power envelope make it the stronger processor in this comparison. The Intel part's near-parity in physics simulation (2.8% delta) represents its closest competitive moment, but even there, AMD takes the win. The data confirms that the AMD processor belongs to a higher performance tier, and the Intel processor, while competent, does not match AMD's throughput in any measured category.