AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark data splits the two processors into distinct roles. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins 3 of 11 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H takes 8. The AMD part dominates integer-heavy workloads and data compression, whereas the Intel part leads in floating-point math, encryption, prime-number finding, physics simulation, and raw multi-threaded throughput.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185's largest victory comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 117,832 against Intel's 83,695, a margin of 40.8%. This is a decisive gap that points toward general-purpose computing, database operations, and any workload that relies on integer arithmetic. The AMD chip also wins data compression with 374,429 versus 327,455, a 14.3% advantage, making it the stronger choice for archiving, file transfer, and storage-related tasks. Random string sorting goes to AMD as well, 40,557 versus 39,814, though the 1.9% delta is narrow and less consequential.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H counters with several substantial wins. Floating-point math shows a 31.9% lead, scoring 103,615 against 70,587. Physics simulation favors Intel by 38.5%, with 2,880 versus 1,772. Prime-number finding is the largest single gap in either direction: Intel scores 326 versus AMD's 129, a 60.4% advantage. Data encryption also belongs to Intel, 25,845 versus 19,612, a 24.1% lead. The multi-threaded PassMark score goes to Intel, 33,429 versus 31,817, a 4.8% edge. Single-thread performance is nearly even, with Intel ahead by 1.6% (4,043 versus 3,977). Extended instructions also favor Intel by 1.3% (26,901 versus 26,544).

The pattern is clear: AMD wins where integer throughput and compression matter, Intel wins where floating-point math, encryption, and physics simulation dominate. The multithread score favors Intel despite AMD having more threads, which suggests Intel's core design and scheduling deliver higher aggregate throughput in this specific test.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different foundries and process nodes. AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process with a die size of 233 mm², while Intel uses its own 3 nm process. The AMD part is codenamed Gorgon Point and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel's part is codenamed Panther Lake and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, specifically Panther Lake-H.

Core counts differ significantly. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 16 cores and 16 threads. Intel has more physical cores but no hyperthreading, so its thread count equals its core count. AMD relies on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. This explains why AMD wins integer math despite having fewer cores: each of its threads can process integer operations more efficiently.

Cache layouts also diverge. AMD uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3. Intel uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core caches align with its higher single-thread score and its advantage in floating-point and physics workloads, which often benefit from larger working sets. AMD's smaller per-core caches are offset by its higher boost clock.

Clock speeds favor AMD. Both base at 2.00 GHz, but AMD boosts to 5.10 GHz versus Intel's 4.80 GHz. That 0.30 GHz difference likely contributes to AMD's strong integer performance. Power limits are close: AMD's TDP is 28, Intel's is 25. Memory bandwidth favors Intel, with 115.2 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus. AMD supports ECC memory; Intel does not. PCIe generations differ: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: AMD has Radeon 890M, Intel has Intel Xe3 Graphics. Sockets are not interchangeable: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, Intel uses Intel BGA 2540. Release dates place Intel first at 2026-01-04, followed by AMD at 2026-02-28.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H does not.

Q: Which chip has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 physical cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has 12. However, AMD has 24 threads versus Intel's 16 threads.

Q: What is the multithread benchmark score difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 33,429 in PassMark multithread, which is 4.8% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185's 31,817.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has an average benchmark score of 62,839, compared to the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H's 41,263.

Q: What process nodes do the two chips use?

A: AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process, while Intel uses its own 3 nm process.

Specification Differences

The table below only lists fields where the two processors differ.

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 | Intel Core Ultra 7 366H |

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

| Cores | 12 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 28 | 25 |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die size | 233 mm² | Not available |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 16 MB | 18 MB shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 12 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 890M | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Release date | 2026-02-28 | 2026-01-04 |

| Part number | unknown | SA4R9Q9EL |

Both chips share the same base clock of 2.00 GHz, dual-channel memory bus, DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory support, mobile market segment, active production status, and locked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest single win belongs to Intel in prime-number finding. Intel's 326 score versus AMD's 129 represents a 60.4% gap. This test measures algorithmic efficiency in a tight loop, and Intel's larger L2 cache of 2.5 MB per core likely helps. The margin is so large that it skews the overall impression of the comparison, but it is one workload among many.

AMD's largest win is integer math at 40.8%. The 117,832 score against Intel's 83,695 shows that AMD's Zen 5 cores, despite having fewer of them, process integer instructions at a much higher rate. This is the kind of result that matters for compilers, office applications, and system-level tasks.

Data compression goes to AMD by 14.3%, with 374,429 versus 327,455. This aligns with the integer math result, since compression algorithms are integer-heavy. Random string sorting also favors AMD, but only by 1.9%, which is within noise territory.

Floating-point math is a clear Intel win at 31.9%. Intel's 103,615 versus AMD's 70,587 shows that the Panther Lake architecture handles floating-point operations substantially better. This matters for scientific computing, 3D rendering, and financial modeling. Physics simulation follows the same pattern, with Intel ahead by 38.5% (2,880 versus 1,772). Physics engines rely heavily on floating-point calculations, so this result is consistent.

Data encryption favors Intel by 24.1% (25,845 versus 19,612). Modern encryption uses integer operations, but Intel's advantage here may stem from its newer core design and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. Extended instructions are essentially tied, with Intel ahead by 1.3%. Single-thread performance is also close, Intel ahead by 1.6% (4,043 versus 3,977). The multithread score goes to Intel by 4.8%, which is notable because AMD has 24 threads against Intel's 16. Intel's 16 physical cores without hyperthreading still deliver higher aggregate throughput in this test.

The average benchmark scores tell a broader story. AMD's average is 62,839, which places it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Intel's average is 41,263, at the 87th percentile. AMD's nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX with an average score of 62,738, a 0.2% delta. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H's nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H with 41,215, a 0.1% delta. AMD's closest competitors also include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 at 62,498 (0.5% delta), while Intel's include the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41,376 (-0.3% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H at 40,967 (0.7% delta).

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear split. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is the stronger integer processor. Its 40.8% lead in integer math and 14.3% lead in data compression indicate that general-purpose computing, database work, and file handling will run faster on this chip. It also holds a 93rd percentile ranking against all CPUs, compared to Intel's 87th, and its average benchmark score of 62,839 far exceeds Intel's 41,263. For workloads that are predominantly integer-based, AMD is the pick.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the stronger floating-point processor. Its 31.9% lead in floating-point math, 38.5% lead in physics, and 60.4% lead in prime-number finding make it the better choice for scientific, rendering, and simulation workloads. It also wins data encryption by 24.1% and edges out AMD in single-thread performance by 1.6%. The multithread score favors Intel by 4.8%, so for parallel workloads that are not integer-bound, Intel delivers more throughput.

The architecture differences reinforce this split. Intel's 16 cores and 18 MB of shared L3 provide more physical resources, while AMD's 24 threads and 5.10 GHz boost clock provide higher per-thread integer throughput. Intel's 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s supports its floating-point advantage. AMD's ECC support makes it more suitable for error-sensitive server or embedded environments. Intel's PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes offers newer connectivity, while AMD's Gen 4 with 16 lanes provides more lanes.

Neither chip is universally better. The choice depends on workload mix. For integer-heavy tasks, compression, and general productivity, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 delivers the higher scores. For floating-point math, physics, encryption, and multi-threaded rendering, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the data-backed selection. The benchmark results are unambiguous: each processor wins where its architecture is strongest.