AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i vs Intel Core 7 150HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i versus the Intel Core 7 150HL. Both processors have an average benchmark score of zero, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all CPUs in the database. This means the measured data does not yet indicate a performance winner in any workload category. The absence of scores is notable given that both parts are marked as Active in production status, suggesting they are current products that simply have not been populated with benchmark results in this database.

Without direct measurements, the closest comparison comes from their structural specifications. The AMD part uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part uses 14 cores and 20 threads. Thread count favors AMD by four threads, which typically helps in heavily parallel workloads such as rendering or compilation. Core count favors Intel by two physical cores, which can benefit workloads that scale with core count rather than thread count. However, these are architectural differences, not measured scores, so the database cannot confirm how they translate into real performance.

The boost clock difference is narrow: the AMD chip reaches 5.10 GHz, while the Intel chip reaches 5.00 GHz. The base clock favors Intel, at 2.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz for AMD. The database records no benchmark wins for either side, so the head-to-head section must remain a statement of missing data rather than an analysis of results. Any inference about performance would require measured scores, which are absent.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design lineages. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i 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. The Intel Core 7 150HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS variant, and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The process node difference is substantial: 4 nm versus 10 nm, which generally implies denser transistors and potentially better power efficiency for the AMD part, though the database does not record transistor counts for either chip.

Cache hierarchies differ in structure. Both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel part has 2 MB per core. L3 cache differs in both size and organization: AMD provides 16 MB of L3, while Intel provides 24 MB shared. The larger shared L3 on the Intel chip could benefit workloads that reuse a working set across cores, while the per-core L2 advantage on Intel might reduce latency for single-threaded tasks. The database does not include total L3 figures or any 3D V-Cache for either.

Memory support diverges. The AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with dual-channel memory and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but the database records no memory bandwidth figure for it. ECC memory is supported on the AMD side, while the Intel side does not support ECC. The PCIe interface also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This means the AMD processor exposes twice the CPU-attached PCIe lanes, which could matter for embedded systems with multiple high-speed devices.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD part uses the Radeon 890M, while the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible. The AMD chip is classified as a Mobile market segment part, while the Intel chip is classified as Desktop, despite both being embedded-oriented products. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700.

Where Each One Wins

Since the database contains no benchmark scores for either processor, the wins must be inferred from specification differences rather than measured results. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i offers 24 threads versus 20 threads on the Intel Core 7 150HL, a four-thread advantage that typically favors multithreaded workloads such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and server-style parallel processing. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, which could edge out lightly threaded tasks that rely on single-core burst speed. The AMD part’s 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, recorded in the database, provides a concrete advantage in memory-throughput-sensitive applications, especially compared to the Intel part, which has no recorded bandwidth figure.

The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which is critical for embedded and reliability-focused systems where data integrity matters. The 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes on the AMD side double the Intel part’s 8 lanes, enabling more simultaneous high-speed peripherals such as NVMe drives, GPUs, or accelerators. The 4 nm process from TSMC, compared to Intel’s 10 nm node, suggests better power efficiency, though the database does not record power measurements beyond TDP. The AMD part’s TDP is 28 watts, while the Intel part’s TDP is 45 watts, indicating the AMD chip is designed for a lower thermal envelope.

The Intel Core 7 150HL wins on raw core count, with 14 physical cores versus 12 on the AMD side. For workloads that scale with physical cores rather than threads, such as certain virtualization scenarios or specific physics simulations, the two extra cores could provide an advantage. The Intel chip also has a higher base clock at 2.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, which helps sustained all-core workloads that cannot boost indefinitely. The Intel L3 cache is larger at 24 MB shared versus 16 MB, and the L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 1 MB per core, giving Intel a cache capacity advantage overall. The Intel chip also supports DDR4 memory in addition to DDR5, which allows system designers to use older, possibly more mature memory platforms.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. Core counts: AMD has 12 cores, Intel has 14 cores. Threads: AMD has 24, Intel has 20. Base clock: AMD 2.00 GHz, Intel 2.40 GHz. Boost clock: AMD 5.10 GHz, Intel 5.00 GHz. TDP: AMD 28 watts, Intel 45 watts. Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700. Process node: AMD 4 nm at TSMC, Intel 10 nm at Intel. Codename: Gorgon Point versus Raptor Lake-PS. Generation: Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) versus Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS). Cache: L2 is 1 MB per core on AMD versus 2 MB per core on Intel; L3 is 16 MB on AMD versus 24 MB shared on Intel. L1 is identical at 80 KB per core.

Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth: AMD recorded at 89.6 GB/s, Intel has no recorded figure. ECC memory: AMD supports it, Intel does not. PCIe: AMD Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics: Radeon 890M versus Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. Market segment: AMD Mobile, Intel Desktop. Release date: AMD 2026-02-28, Intel 2024-04-07. Production status is Active for both. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP, neither is multiplier-unlocked, and both have identical percentiles at 50 and average benchmark scores of zero. The die size is recorded only for AMD at 233 mm², while Intel has no die size entry.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL has 14 cores versus 12 cores on the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i. However, the AMD part has more threads: 24 threads versus 20 threads on Intel.

Q: What is the difference in clock speeds?

A: The AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 150HL does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: Both have 80 KB of L1 per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core and 16 MB of L3. The Intel part has 2 MB of L2 per core and 24 MB of shared L3.

Q: What is the TDP for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i has a TDP of 28 watts. The Intel Core 7 150HL has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core 7 150HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD part is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel part is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel.

The Verdict

The database shows no benchmark scores for either processor, so the verdict must rest on specification differences. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i is the stronger choice for systems that prioritize thread count, memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe lane availability, and power efficiency. Its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, 24 threads, 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, ECC capability, and 28-watt TDP make it suited for embedded or mobile workloads where data integrity, I/O expansion, and thermal constraints are primary concerns. The 4 nm process at TSMC, while not a measured performance figure, supports the lower TDP. The 5.10 GHz boost clock gives it a slight single-thread burst edge over the Intel part.

The Intel Core 7 150HL is the stronger choice for systems that need more physical cores, larger cache capacity, and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its 14 cores, 24 MB shared L3, and 2 MB per-core L2 provide a structural advantage for workloads that scale with core count and benefit from a larger cache pool. The higher base clock of 2.40 GHz helps sustained all-core loads. The Intel part’s Desktop market segment classification, despite a higher 45-watt TDP, indicates it is designed for embedded desktop-style deployments where power envelope is less restrictive.

Neither processor has recorded benchmark results, so the choice depends entirely on the target application’s requirements. For mobile or compact embedded designs needing ECC, high memory bandwidth, and many threads, the AMD part aligns with those needs. For desktop-embedded designs prioritizing physical core count, cache size, and memory flexibility, the Intel part aligns with those needs. The data does not support a performance ranking; it supports a feature-based selection. Both parts are Active in production, so availability is not a differentiator in the database. The AMD part has a later release date of 2026-02-28, while the Intel part released on 2024-04-07, which may matter for platform maturity but is not a performance factor.