AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235T Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 and Intel Core Ultra 5 235T present two fundamentally different interpretations of modern processor design, one aimed at efficient mobile integration and the other at desktop compute. The database records a clear split in workload dominance, with the AMD part taking 5 benchmark wins and the Intel part taking 6. While the Intel chip holds a higher single-thread score, the AMD processor counters with a substantial lead in integer math and data compression, making the choice heavily dependent on the specific application environment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 records an average benchmark score of 62839, which is significantly higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T's average of 38561. The AMD part sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits in the 86th percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins the PassMark multithread test with a score of 31817, a 2.9% advantage over the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T's score of 30918. This narrow margin aligns with the AMD processor's 24 threads versus the Intel processor's 14 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which is slightly higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T's boost clock of 5.00 GHz. However, the Intel part still wins the single-thread benchmark with a score of 4339.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185's 89.6 GB/s. Both processors support dual-channel memory, but the Intel part supports DDR5 only, while the AMD part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has 16 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part also has a larger L2 cache per core at 3 MB compared to the AMD part's 1 MB per core.

Q: Does the AMD part support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T does not support ECC memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply at the architectural level. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses the Gorgon Point codename and is built on a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c generation, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T uses the Arrow Lake-S architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 2, and is manufactured on a smaller 3 nm process, also at TSMC. The Intel part has a higher transistor count at 17,800 million, while the AMD part's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Core configuration differs meaningfully. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part has 14 cores and 14 threads, indicating no hyperthreading. This explains why the AMD part can hold its own in multithreaded workloads despite having fewer physical cores. The Intel part has a larger die at 243 mm² compared to the AMD part's 233 mm². Cache hierarchies also differ: the AMD part uses 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel part uses 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. The Intel part's L3 cache is 24 MB shared, versus 16 MB on the AMD side.

Platform support varies considerably. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses AMD Socket FP8 and targets the mobile market segment, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T uses Intel Socket 1851 and targets the desktop segment. The AMD part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel part supports only DDR5. PCIe capability also differs, with the AMD part offering Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only) and the Intel part offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part uses a Radeon 890M, while the Intel part uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is the stronger choice for heavily threaded integer workloads and data manipulation. Its 39.9% lead in integer math and 26.9% lead in data compression are the largest margins recorded in the head-to-head results. The 24 threads give it a structural advantage in parallel tasks, and its 93rd percentile ranking places it well above the Intel part's 86th percentile.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T is the better option for single-thread responsiveness and floating-point or prime-number calculations. It wins the single-thread test with a score of 4339, an 8.3% margin, and it dominates floating-point math with a 33.7% lead. Its 14 cores and higher base clock of 2.20 GHz provide a solid foundation for workloads that do not scale well with thread count. The Intel part also has a higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s, which supports its faster memory operations.

The average benchmark score gap is substantial, with the AMD part at 62839 versus the Intel part at 38561, but this difference is heavily influenced by the AMD part's strong showing in integer math and compression. The Intel part counters with wins in physics, encryption, and prime number finding. Users with mixed workloads should weigh the AMD part's multithreaded throughput against the Intel part's single-thread and floating-point dominance.

Specification Differences

The core counts differ: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T has 14 cores and 14 threads. Base clocks differ, with the AMD part at 2.00 GHz and the Intel part at 2.20 GHz. Boost clocks are close, with the AMD part at 5.10 GHz and the Intel part at 5.00 GHz. Thermal design power differs substantially, with the AMD part at 28 W and the Intel part at 65 W.

The process nodes differ, with the AMD part on 4 nm and the Intel part on 3 nm. The AMD part has a die size of 233 mm², while the Intel part is 243 mm². The Intel part has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million, while the AMD part's is not listed. Cache configurations differ across all levels, with the Intel part using larger L1, L2, and L3 caches. Memory support differs, with the AMD part supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel part supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth favors the Intel part at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. ECC support is present on the AMD part but absent on the Intel part. PCIe generation and lane counts differ, with Gen 4 and 16 lanes on the AMD side versus Gen 5 and 20 lanes on the Intel side. The integrated graphics units differ, with the AMD part using Radeon 890M and the Intel part using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. Sockets differ, with AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1851. The market segments differ, with mobile for the AMD part and desktop for the Intel part. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $247.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 comes in integer math, where it scores 117832 against the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T's 84244, a 39.9% advantage. This is followed by data compression, where the AMD part scores 374429 versus 295100, a 26.9% margin. The AMD part also wins random string sorting with a score of 40557 versus 35377, a 14.6% lead, and extended instructions with 26544 versus 23212, a 14.4% lead. The multithread test goes to the AMD part by a slim margin, 31817 versus 30918, a 2.9% difference.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T takes its largest win in prime number finding, scoring 318 against the AMD part's 129, a 59.4% margin. Floating-point math also goes strongly to the Intel part, with 106546 versus 70587, a 33.7% lead. Physics favors the Intel part, with 2157 versus 1772, a 17.8% margin. Data encryption goes to the Intel part, with 23457 versus 19612, a 16.4% lead. The single-thread test, recorded twice in the database as passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, goes to the Intel part by an 8.3% margin, with scores of 4339 versus 3977.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins in scenarios that demand high integer throughput and data manipulation. Integer math, data compression, and random string sorting are the clear strengths, and the multithread test confirms its ability to handle parallel workloads. The 24 threads and 2.9% multithread win suggest that heavily threaded applications, such as compilation or scientific computing with integer operations, would favor the AMD part. Its 93rd percentile ranking and average score of 62839 also indicate strong overall performance relative to the broader CPU landscape.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins in scenarios that require fast single-thread execution and heavy floating-point or prime-number calculations. The 59.4% lead in prime number finding and 33.7% lead in floating-point math are decisive, and the 8.3% single-thread advantage makes it the better fit for latency-sensitive applications. Data encryption also favors the Intel part, which could matter for security-focused workloads. The higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s supports its memory-intensive operations, and the 14 physical cores provide ample raw throughput for tasks that do not benefit from simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part's 86th percentile ranking, while lower than the AMD part's, still places it in a strong position among desktop processors.