AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i vs Intel Processor 300 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i and the Intel Processor 300?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i uses 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Processor 300 uses 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Processor 300 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i's base clock of 2.00 GHz.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor 300 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What type of integrated graphics does each processor use?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i features a Radeon 890M integrated GPU. The Intel Processor 300 uses the UHD Graphics 710.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory. The Intel Processor 300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory.

Q: When was each processor released?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i has a release date of 2026-02-28. The Intel Processor 300 was released on 2024-01-07.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i is built on the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation, which uses a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c core design. The manufacturing process is 4 nm at TSMC, and the die size measures 233 mm². In contrast, the Intel Processor 300 uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-S, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 163 mm².

The core topology differs substantially. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, with an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 1 MB per core, and an L3 cache of 16 MB. The Intel part has 2 cores and 4 threads, with the same 80 KB per core L1 cache but a larger 1.25 MB per core L2 cache and a smaller 6 MB shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 advantage on the Intel side does not compensate for the massive difference in aggregate cache capacity.

Memory support diverges as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Processor 300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, but no bandwidth figure is recorded for it. The AMD part also supports ECC memory while the Intel part does not.

PCIe connectivity differs by generation. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Processor 300 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part thus offers a newer PCIe generation, while the AMD part uses a more power-efficient process node.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP8, while Intel uses Socket 1700. The market segments also differ, with the AMD part classified as Mobile and the Intel part as Desktop. The production status for both is Active. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently contains no recorded benchmark scores for either processor. The average benchmark score for both the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i and the Intel Processor 300 is 0. The percentile versus all CPUs is 50 for both parts, which places them at the midpoint of the distribution when considering the overall population of processors in the database.

Without measured scores, the head-to-head comparison relies on structural specifications. The AMD part has 6 times the cores and 6 times the threads of the Intel part. For multi-threaded workloads, this core and thread advantage is decisive on paper. The AMD part also has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Processor 300 has no recorded boost clock, only a base clock of 3.90 GHz. The AMD part's boost capability, combined with its core count, indicates a strong potential for parallel throughput.

The Intel Processor 300 has a higher base clock of 3.90 GHz versus 2.00 GHz on the AMD part. For lightly threaded workloads that rely on single-core frequency, the Intel part may hold an advantage in base clock terms. However, the AMD part's boost clock of 5.10 GHz suggests it can reach significantly higher frequencies under load, assuming the boost algorithm engages properly.

The AMD part's memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is recorded, while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure. This suggests the AMD platform is designed for higher data throughput, which benefits workloads that are memory-bound. The Intel part's support for DDR4 as well as DDR5 gives it flexibility in platform cost and compatibility, but the AMD part's LPDDR5X support is oriented toward mobile and embedded power efficiency.

The integrated graphics differ substantially. The AMD Radeon 890M is a modern integrated GPU designed for embedded and mobile use, while the Intel UHD Graphics 710 is a basic desktop iGPU. For tasks like video decode, light gaming, or GPU-accelerated compute, the AMD part likely delivers more capability, though no benchmark numbers exist to quantify the difference.

The die size difference is notable: 233 mm² for AMD versus 163 mm² for Intel. The larger AMD die accommodates more cores, more cache, and a more powerful integrated GPU. The Intel die is smaller but uses an older 10 nm process, which explains the larger physical size relative to its modest core count.

The Verdict

The data indicates two processors aimed at different segments. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i, with 12 cores, 24 threads, a 5.10 GHz boost clock, 16 MB of L3 cache, and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, is positioned for embedded and mobile workloads that require parallel processing and memory throughput. Its ECC memory support and LPDDR5X compatibility reinforce this orientation toward reliability and power-sensitive applications.

The Intel Processor 300, with 2 cores, 4 threads, a 3.90 GHz base clock, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache, is a desktop entry-level part. Its support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 5 lanes gives it platform flexibility, and its launch MSRP is $82. The higher base clock suits single-threaded tasks, but the core count severely limits multi-threaded performance.

For users who need to run many parallel threads, process large datasets, or use integrated graphics with more capability, the AMD part is the logical choice based on the recorded specifications. For users who need a simple desktop processor with a high base clock and do not require multi-core throughput, the Intel part fits that role. The absence of benchmark data means these conclusions are drawn from architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance.

The percentile versus all CPUs being 50 for both parts is a curious data point. It suggests that when placed against the entire database population, both processors sit at the median. This may reflect the database's distribution of scores rather than any equivalence between these two parts, as their specifications are far apart in core count, cache, and memory support.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i and the Intel Processor 300:

• Cores: 12 (AMD) vs 2 (Intel)
• Threads: 24 (AMD) vs 4 (Intel)
• Base Clock: 2.00 GHz (AMD) vs 3.90 GHz (Intel)
• Boost Clock: 5.10 GHz (AMD) vs null (Intel)
• TDP: 28 (AMD) vs 46 (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 vs Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Gorgon Point vs Raptor Lake-S
• Generation: Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) vs Intel Processor (Raptor Lake)
• Process Node: 4 nm (AMD) vs 10 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC vs Intel
• Die Size: 233 mm² (AMD) vs 163 mm² (Intel)
• L2 Cache: 1 MB per core (AMD) vs 1.25 MB per core (Intel)
• L3 Cache: 16 MB (AMD) vs 6 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory Support: DDR5, LPDDR5X (AMD) vs DDR4, DDR5 (Intel)
• Memory Bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (AMD) vs null (Intel)
• ECC Memory: true (AMD) vs false (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 16 Lanes (AMD) vs Gen 5, 16 Lanes (Intel)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 890M (AMD) vs UHD Graphics 710 (Intel)
• Market Segment: Mobile (AMD) vs Desktop (Intel)
• Release Date: 2026-02-28 (AMD) vs 2024-01-07 (Intel)
• Launch MSRP: null (AMD) vs $82 (Intel)
• Part Number: unknown (AMD) vs SRN3J (Intel)

The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core for both processors. Both support dual-channel memory buses. Both have 16 PCIe lanes from the CPU. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i wins in scenarios that demand parallel processing. With 12 cores and 24 threads, it has a 6x core advantage over the Intel Processor 300. Workloads such as compilation, rendering, scientific simulation, virtualization, and database processing would benefit from this core count. The 16 MB L3 cache provides a larger shared pool for working sets, and the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth supports data-intensive operations. The boost clock of 5.10 GHz gives it high single-thread headroom when needed, while the 4 nm process node and 28 TDP indicate a power-efficient design suitable for embedded and mobile systems.

The AMD part also wins on integrated graphics capability. The Radeon 890M is a more capable iGPU than the Intel UHD Graphics 710. For embedded systems that need GPU compute, video processing, or display output without a discrete card, the AMD part is clearly superior based on the recorded specifications. ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running embedded workloads where data integrity is critical.

The Intel Processor 300 wins in scenarios that prioritize high base clock frequency and platform flexibility. Its 3.90 GHz base clock is nearly double the AMD part's 2.00 GHz base clock. For single-threaded desktop tasks such as legacy application compatibility, basic office work, or lightweight web browsing, the Intel part may respond more quickly per core. Its support for DDR4 memory allows reuse of existing cheaper memory modules, and its PCIe Gen 5 interface offers newer connectivity for storage or expansion cards.

The Intel part also wins on desktop integration. It uses the LGA 1700 socket, a standard desktop platform, and has a launch MSRP of $82. The AMD part is classified as Mobile, requiring an embedded or mobile platform design. For a straightforward desktop build, the Intel Processor 300 is the more conventional choice.

The TDP difference is notable: 46 for Intel versus 28 for AMD. Despite the AMD part having more cores and a larger die, it consumes less power according to the TDP rating. This suggests the AMD part is more efficient per watt, which matters in thermally constrained embedded environments. The Intel part's higher TDP may allow for sustained base clock operation but at higher cooling requirements.

In summary, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185i is the choice for multi-threaded, memory-intensive, and GPU-capable embedded workloads. The Intel Processor 300 is the choice for basic desktop tasks, high base clock responsiveness, and platform flexibility with DDR4 or DDR5 memory. The database contains no benchmark scores to validate performance beyond these specification-based conclusions, so these outcomes are derived from the recorded architectural data.