AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i vs Intel Core 7 160UL Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i and Intel Core 7 160UL represent two distinct approaches to embedded computing, with the database showing a clear split in their capabilities. The AMD part, built on a newer 4 nm process from TSMC, offers a 12-core, 24-thread configuration with a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm node, provides 10 cores and 12 threads with a significantly lower 15 W TDP. The recorded data indicates that the Intel Core 7 160UL holds a 69th percentile ranking among all CPUs, whereas the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i sits at the 50th percentile, though this metric reflects the entire benchmark suite rather than targeted workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 160UL demonstrates its strengths across a broad range of recorded benchmark tests, particularly in sustained multi-threaded and single-threaded operations. In Cinebench R23, the Intel chip scores 9,386 points in multi-core and 1,325 points in single-core, while Cinebench R20 results show 3,942 multi-core and 556 single-core scores. The PassMark suite further reveals consistent advantages: integer math at 47,515, floating point math at 25,670, and extended instructions at 5,832. Data compression work reaches 108,953, and random string sorting hits 11,843, indicating strong performance in memory-intensive and algorithmic tasks. The physics test records 819 points, and the multithread score stands at 11,043.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i, however, shows no recorded benchmark scores in the database, leaving its performance profile to be inferred from architectural specifications. The head-to-head benchmark data is empty, and the wins counter for the AMD part is zero across all recorded tests. This absence of direct measurements means the comparative analysis relies entirely on the Intel part's recorded results and the architectural differences between the two processors. The Intel chip's 69th percentile placement suggests it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all CPUs in the database, a position that reflects its solid all-around showing in the available tests.

The use-case split becomes clear when examining the Intel part's strengths: it excels in mixed workloads that combine integer and floating point calculations, data manipulation, and physics simulations. The single-thread score of 3,391 in PassMark and the Cinebench R15 single-core result of 133 indicate responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. For the AMD part, the absence of benchmark data means its wins cannot be quantified, but the architectural specifications suggest a focus on higher core counts and newer process technology rather than measured performance superiority in the current database records.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their underlying design philosophies. 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. This hybrid core arrangement pairs high-performance Zen 5 cores with efficiency-focused Zen 5c cores, all fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. The die size measures 233 mm², and the cache hierarchy provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X across a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and ECC memory support enabled.

The Intel Core 7 160UL, by contrast, relies on the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-PS codename, using Intel's 10 nm process. Its cache configuration offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support covers DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded, and ECC memory is not supported. The PCIe implementation differs as well: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part offers Gen 4 with only 8 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics present another key distinction. The AMD chip pairs its CPU cores with a Radeon 890M iGPU, while the Intel chip uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The AMD part targets the mobile market segment with an AMD Socket FP8, whereas the Intel part is classified as a desktop component using Intel Socket 1700. The release dates also separate these parts substantially, with the Intel chip appearing in the database on April 7, 2024, and the AMD chip following much later on February 28, 2026. The Intel part's base clock runs at 1.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the AMD part starts at 2.00 GHz and boosts to 5.10 GHz, giving Intel a marginal 0.10 GHz advantage in peak frequency.

The Verdict

The recorded data points firmly toward the Intel Core 7 160UL as the better-measured performer across every benchmark where data exists, and its 69th percentile ranking versus the AMD part's 50th percentile reinforces this position. The Intel chip's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 9,386 and single-core score of 1,325 represent substantial margins over what the AMD part's specifications suggest, though no direct comparison is possible without AMD benchmark records. The Intel part also consumes less power at 15 W TDP compared to the AMD part's 28 W TDP, making it the more efficient choice for thermally constrained embedded systems.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i offers advantages that the data cannot quantify but the specifications make evident: 12 cores and 24 threads versus 10 cores and 12 threads, a newer 4 nm process versus 10 nm, and support for ECC memory, which the Intel part lacks. The AMD chip's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds the unrecorded figure for Intel, and its 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes double the Intel part's 8 lanes. These features position the AMD part for workloads requiring higher memory throughput, error-correcting memory, or more expansion capability, even though no benchmark scores exist to confirm performance in those scenarios.

For buyers who prioritize measured performance and lower power draw, the Intel Core 7 160UL is the data-backed choice. For those who need ECC support, more PCIe lanes, or a newer manufacturing process, the AMD part presents a compelling architectural option, but its actual performance remains unverified in the database. The choice ultimately hinges on whether proven benchmark results or forward-looking specifications matter more for the specific embedded application.

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread count difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, giving AMD a 2-core and 12-thread advantage.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL boosts to 5.20 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i's 5.10 GHz boost clock.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD part has ECC memory support enabled, while the Intel Core 7 160UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the recorded benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i; all recorded benchmark results belong to the Intel Core 7 160UL.

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 160UL rank among all CPUs?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL holds a 69th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has a TDP of 15 W, which is 13 W lower than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i's 28 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data in the database is empty, meaning no direct comparative tests exist between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i and the Intel Core 7 160UL. However, the Intel part's individual benchmark scores provide a complete picture of its measured performance. In Cinebench R15, the Intel chip records 946 multi-core and 133 single-core points. The R20 version shows 3,942 multi-core and 556 single-core scores, while R23 delivers 9,386 multi-core and 1,325 single-core results. These scores indicate strong scaling across Cinebench versions, with multi-core performance improving consistently as the test's complexity increases.

The PassMark suite reveals the Intel part's breadth. Data compression scores 108,953, data encryption reaches 7,146, and extended instructions hit 5,832. The find prime numbers test records 50, while floating point math scores 25,670 and integer math scores 47,515. Multithread performance stands at 11,043, physics at 819, and random string sorting at 11,843. Single-thread performance appears twice in the records with identical scores of 3,391, confirming consistency. The Intel part's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C with an average score of 14,277 and a delta of -0.3%, the Intel Core i5-10400F at 14,185 with a delta of +0.3%, the Intel Xeon 6756E at 14,163 with a delta of +0.5%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U at 14,320 with a delta of -0.6%. The Intel Core 7 160UL's average benchmark score of 14,232 places it within a tight competitive band, trailing the Ryzen 5 3501U by 0.6% and leading the Xeon 6756E by 0.5%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 7 160UL uses 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks stand at 2.00 GHz for AMD and 1.80 GHz for Intel, a 0.20 GHz difference, while boost clocks show 5.10 GHz for AMD and 5.20 GHz for Intel, a 0.10 GHz difference in Intel's favor. TDP ratings separate them by 13 W, with AMD at 28 W and Intel at 15 W.

The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. Process nodes differ significantly: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, while Intel uses 10 nm from its own foundry. Cache configurations show L1 at 80 KB per core for both, but L2 differs at 1 MB per core for AMD versus 1.25 MB per core for Intel, and L3 totals 16 MB for AMD versus 12 MB for Intel. Memory support covers DDR5 and LPDDR5X for AMD, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is recorded at 89.6 GB/s for AMD, with no figure for Intel. ECC memory is enabled on AMD but not on Intel. PCIe implementation gives AMD 16 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, while Intel provides 8 Gen 4 lanes. Integrated graphics differ with AMD's Radeon 890M versus Intel's Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. Market segments classify AMD as Mobile and Intel as Desktop. The AMD part's codename is Gorgon Point with a Ryzen AI Embedded generation based on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, while the Intel part's codename is Raptor Lake-PS with a Raptor Lake architecture. Release dates place Intel on April 7, 2024, and AMD on February 28, 2026. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both are marked as Active in production status.