AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U vs Intel Core 5 221E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U and the Intel Core 5 221E occupy different positions in the database, and the recorded performance data reflects that split. The Intel part has a full benchmark suite on file, while the AMD processor has no recorded scores in the database, meaning direct numeric comparisons are limited. However, the available Intel measurements can be interpreted against its nearest rivals to establish a performance envelope.

The Intel Core 5 221E delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25,933 and a single-core score of 3,661. In Cinebench R20, it records 10,891 multi-core and 1,537 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 2,613 multi-core and 368 single-core. These results place the chip at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 40,144.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core 5 221E are tightly clustered. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700 averages 40,081, which is 0.2% behind the Intel chip. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 also scores 40,048, again 0.2% behind. The AMD Ryzen 9 270 leads by 0.3% with a score of 40,246, and the Intel Core i9-13905H leads by 0.4% with 40,313. The deltas are small, so the Core 5 221E sits in a competitive band rather than dominating or being dominated.

PassMark workloads show where the Intel part is strongest. Integer math scores 117,813, floating point math scores 79,028, and extended instructions score 18,216. Data compression reaches 324,285, which is a standout result, while data encryption scores 19,205. Random string sorting records 37,686, and the multithread score is 30,510. The physics test delivers 2,230, and the prime number search is the weak spot at 173. Single-thread performance is 4,147.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has no benchmark entries in the database, so its average score is zero and its percentile sits at 50. This does not mean the processor is incapable; it means the database lacks recorded measurements for it. The analysis must therefore rely on architectural and specification differences, plus the Intel part's proven results, to characterize the matchup.

The Verdict

The database shows a clear split: the Intel Core 5 221E has extensive recorded performance data, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has none. For users who require verified benchmark numbers, the Intel processor is the only one with evidence in the database. Its 87th percentile ranking and average score of 40,144 indicate solid performance across mixed workloads, with nearest rivals within 0.4%, so it is not an outlier in either direction.

The AMD part, despite lacking scores, offers a different profile: a 28 W thermal envelope versus 65 W for Intel, a 4 nm process node versus 10 nm, and a mobile market segment designation. The Intel chip is a desktop part. The data suggests that the AMD processor targets lower-power embedded applications, while the Intel processor targets desktop workloads where higher power draw is acceptable.

The Intel Core 5 221E also has a launch MSRP of $232, which is the only price information in the database. The AMD processor has no price listed. For spec-driven decisions, the Intel chip brings 14 cores and 20 threads against 6 cores and 12 threads for AMD, along with a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The AMD part counters with a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.70 GHz, plus a smaller process node and lower TDP.

The verdict from the data: the Intel Core 5 221E is the choice where measured performance and multi-core throughput matter, and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U is the choice where power efficiency and compact process geometry matter. Each serves a different socket and platform, so the decision is as much about system context as raw scores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U uses Zen 4 architecture on the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 221E uses Bartlett Lake, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. The transistor counts differ: AMD lists 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while Intel does not have a transistor count in the database but lists a 257 mm² die size.

Cache hierarchies differ per core. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has a larger cache at every level, which aligns with its higher core count.

The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD processor supports DDR5 only. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, and both list the same memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which matters for embedded and reliability-focused deployments.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses the Radeon 760M, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 730. These are the architectural facts on record, and they point to different platform philosophies: AMD emphasizes efficiency and a modern node, Intel emphasizes core count, cache capacity, and PCIe generation.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every headline specification. Core count: 6 cores for AMD versus 14 for Intel. Thread count: 12 versus 20. Base clock: 3.50 GHz for AMD versus 2.70 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 4.90 GHz for AMD versus 5.20 GHz for Intel. TDP: 28 W for AMD versus 65 W for Intel.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP8 for the AMD part, Intel Socket 1700 for the Intel part. The AMD processor belongs to the 8000 series with Zen 4 Hawk Point, while the Intel processor is from the Bartlett Lake generation. Process node: 4 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. Foundry: TSMC for AMD versus Intel for the Intel part.

Memory support: DDR5 only for AMD, DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. Both share dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC is enabled on both. PCIe: Gen 4 with 20 lanes for AMD, Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon 760M for AMD, UHD Graphics 730 for Intel.

Market segment: Mobile for AMD, Desktop for Intel. Release dates differ: the AMD part was released in April 2024, the Intel part in January 2025. Production status is Active for both. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a known part number, SRQDVQ659, and a launch MSRP of $232; the AMD part has no price and an unknown part number. The AMD part has no benchmark scores, while the Intel part has a full suite.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the thermal design power for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has a TDP of 28 W. The Intel Core 5 221E has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 221E support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes. The Intel Core 5 221E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U supports DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E boosts to 5.20 GHz. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U boosts to 4.90 GHz. However, the AMD part has a higher base clock at 3.50 GHz versus 2.70 GHz.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core 5 221E?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E has an average benchmark score of 40,144 and sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has no recorded benchmark scores.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U and the Intel Core 5 221E list ECC memory support as true.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 221E wins on measured performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25,933, single-core score of 3,661, and PassMark multithread score of 30,510 are all on record. Its nearest rivals are within 0.4%, so it does not lead its class by a wide margin, but it is a verified performer. The data compression score of 324,285 stands out as a particular strength. The Intel part also wins on core count, thread count, boost clock, cache capacity at every level, PCIe Gen 5 support, and memory flexibility with DDR4 and DDR5.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U wins on efficiency and process technology. Its 28 W TDP is less than half the Intel part's 65 W, and its 4 nm TSMC process node is two generations ahead of Intel's 10 nm node in the database. It carries a smaller die at 178 mm² against Intel's 257 mm², and it lists a much higher transistor density with 25,000 million transistors on that smaller die. Its base clock of 3.50 GHz is higher than Intel's 2.70 GHz, which can benefit lightly threaded workloads that stay at base frequency. It also provides more PCIe lanes (20 versus 16), though at Gen 4 rather than Gen 5.

For embedded deployments where power draw and thermal output are constrained, the AMD part is the logical pick based on its 28 W TDP and mobile segment designation. For desktop or rack workloads where the database has actual scores and the platform can support 65 W, the Intel part is the proven choice. The AMD processor has no benchmark data in the database, so any claim of its performance superiority would be unsupported. The Intel processor, meanwhile, has a complete record and a competitive position among its nearest rivals. The data does not declare a single winner; it declares two different tools for two different jobs.