AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X vs Intel Core 3 N350 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X and the Intel Core 3 N350 occupy opposite ends of the processor spectrum, and the recorded data confirms they are built for entirely different workloads. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop part with a 5.40 GHz boost clock, a 65 TDP, and a 4 nm process node, while the Core 3 N350 is an 8-core, 8-thread mobile part with a 3.90 GHz boost clock, a 7 TDP, and a 10 nm process node. The benchmark database contains no recorded benchmark scores for the Ryzen Embedded 9600X, while the Core 3 N350 has a full suite of scores, an average benchmark score of 9903, and a percentile ranking of 66. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X does have a percentile ranking of 50, but with an average benchmark score of 0, the database indicates it has not been measured yet. This analysis interprets the available data, comparing the architectural and specification differences while using the Core 3 N350's benchmark results and its listed nearest rivals to frame its measured performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 3 N350 is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark wins, and the data shows it is a competent performer in its measured tests. Its strongest results appear in multithreaded workloads, where it scores 6274 points in Cinebench R23 multicore, 2635 points in Cinebench R20 multicore, and 632 points in Cinebench R15 multicore. The single-core scores are lower, with 885 points in Cinebench R23 singlecore, 371 points in Cinebench R20 singlecore, and 89 points in Cinebench R15 singlecore, which indicates a modest per-thread capability relative to its multithreaded output. The PassMark suite reinforces this pattern, with a multithread score of 7382, a single-thread score of 1974, and a floating-point math score of 17781.

The Ryzen Embedded 9600X has no recorded benchmark wins because no benchmark scores exist for it in the database. However, the specification data indicates where it would likely win if measured. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus 3.90 GHz for the Core 3 N350, a dual-channel memory bus versus a single-channel bus, a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s, and support for PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes versus PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The architecture data points to a higher-performance design, with a 4 nm process node, a 70.6 mm² die size, and 8,315 million transistors, while the Core 3 N350 has a 10 nm node and no listed die size or transistor count. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X also has a larger L3 cache, 32 MB shared versus 6 MB shared, and a 1 MB per-core L2 cache, while the Core 3 N350 uses a 2 MB shared L2 cache. These differences suggest the Ryzen Embedded 9600X would win in compute-heavy, memory-sensitive, and I/O-intensive scenarios, while the Core 3 N350 wins in low-power and mobile deployments based on its 7 TDP and measured scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X uses the Granite Ridge codename and belongs to the Ryzen Embedded generation with Zen 5 (Granite Ridge) microarchitecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process node. The Core 3 N350 uses the Twin Lake codename, with an Alder Lake-N generation designation and a 10 nm process node from Intel. The process node difference is significant: the 4 nm node allows the Ryzen Embedded 9600X to pack 8,315 million transistors into a 70.6 mm² die, while the Core 3 N350 has no listed transistor count or die size. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 3 N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning the Intel part has more physical cores but no hyperthreading, while the AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count.

Cache hierarchies are also structured differently. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X uses 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a 32 MB shared L3 cache. The Core 3 N350 uses 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD design prioritizes per-core L2 capacity and a large L3 pool, which benefits workloads that reuse data across cores, while the Intel design has a smaller shared pool that suits lighter tasks. Memory support diverges as well: the Ryzen Embedded 9600X supports DDR5 only with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Core 3 N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 but only on a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 N350 does not. PCIe capabilities differ sharply, with the Ryzen Embedded 9600X offering Gen 5 with 24 lanes versus Gen 3 with 9 lanes for the Core 3 N350, and the integrated graphics differ, with Radeon Graphics on the AMD part and UHD Graphics 770 on the Intel part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

With no benchmark scores recorded for the Ryzen Embedded 9600X, the head-to-head comparison relies on the Core 3 N350's measured results and its nearest rivals. The nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core i7-3770 with an average score of 9706 and a delta of 2 percent, the Intel Core i5-1035G1 with an average score of 9684 and a delta of 2.3 percent, the AMD EPYC 7F52 with an average score of 10159 and a delta of -2.5 percent, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 with an average score of 10230 and a delta of -3.2 percent. The Core 3 N350's average benchmark score of 9903 places it 2 percent above the Core i7-3770 and 2.3 percent above the Core i5-1035G1, while it sits 2.5 percent below the EPYC 7F52 and 3.2 percent below the Xeon Platinum 8280. These deltas are small, indicating the Core 3 N350 performs in the same class as these older or server-grade parts in aggregate.

The individual benchmark scores for the Core 3 N350 show its strengths and weaknesses. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 6274, which is a solid result for an 8-thread mobile processor. The single-core score of 885 in the same test is much lower, reflecting the modest 3.90 GHz boost clock and the 10 nm process. The PassMark tests reveal specific workload behaviors: data compression scores 80444, data encryption scores 5693, extended instructions score 3981, find prime numbers scores 20, floating-point math scores 17781, integer math scores 27669, multithread scores 7382, physics scores 446, random string sorting scores 10102, and single-thread scores 1974. The high data compression and integer math scores suggest the Core 3 N350 handles data processing tasks efficiently, while the low find prime numbers score of 20 indicates weak performance in math-heavy prime calculations. The physics score of 446 is below average, which points to limited floating-point throughput in certain applications.

The Ryzen Embedded 9600X has no recorded scores, so no direct head-to-head benchmark results can be cited. The database shows zero wins for the Ryzen Embedded 9600X and zero wins for the Core 3 N350 in the head-to-head array, which is empty. The only available comparison is the Core 3 N350's position among its nearest rivals, where it holds a 2 percent advantage over the Core i7-3770 and a 2.3 percent advantage over the Core i5-1035G1, but trails the EPYC 7F52 by 2.5 percent and the Xeon Platinum 8280 by 3.2 percent. These deltas confirm that the Core 3 N350 is a mid-tier performer, capable of matching older desktop processors but not leading server-class parts.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows where the two processors differ, and the differences are substantial. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 6 cores and 12 threads, a base clock of 3.90 GHz, a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and a TDP of 65. The Core 3 N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, a base clock of 0.10 GHz, a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, and a TDP of 7. The base clock of 0.10 GHz for the Core 3 N350 is unusually low, which indicates a design focused on power efficiency at idle and light loads, while the Ryzen Embedded 9600X maintains a high base clock of 3.90 GHz for sustained throughput.

The sockets differ, with the Ryzen Embedded 9600X using AMD Socket AM5 and the Core 3 N350 using Intel BGA 1264, meaning the AMD part is socketed for desktop use while the Intel part is soldered for mobile use. The memory support differs, with the Ryzen Embedded 9600X supporting DDR5 only and the Core 3 N350 supporting DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. Memory bus width differs, with the Ryzen Embedded 9600X offering dual-channel and the Core 3 N350 offering single-channel, and memory bandwidth differs, with 89.6 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on the Ryzen Embedded 9600X and absent on the Core 3 N350. PCIe generations and lane counts differ, with Gen 5 and 24 lanes on the AMD part versus Gen 3 and 9 lanes on the Intel part. The integrated graphics differ, with Radeon Graphics on the Ryzen Embedded 9600X and UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 3 N350. The multiplier is unlocked on the Ryzen Embedded 9600X and locked on the Core 3 N350. The market segments differ, with Desktop for the AMD part and Mobile for the Intel part. Release dates differ, with the Ryzen Embedded 9600X released on 2025-10-06 and the Core 3 N350 released on 2025-01-06. Part numbers also differ, with 100-000001405E for the AMD part and SRPNS for the Intel part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 3 N350 has 8 cores, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 6 cores. The AMD part has 12 threads, while the Intel part has 8 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and the Intel Core 3 N350 has a boost clock of 3.90 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 N350 support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel Core 3 N350 does not support ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s with a dual-channel bus. The Intel Core 3 N350 has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s with a single-channel bus.

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 N350 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 3 N350 has an average benchmark score of 9903, which is 2 percent above the Intel Core i7-3770 and 2.3 percent above the Intel Core i5-1035G1. It is 2.5 percent below the AMD EPYC 7F52 and 3.2 percent below the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has a TDP of 65, and the Intel Core 3 N350 has a TDP of 7.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by use case. The Intel Core 3 N350 is a measured performer with an average benchmark score of 9903 and a percentile ranking of 66, and its 7 TDP makes it suitable for mobile or low-power systems. Its benchmark results show competent multithreaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6274 and a PassMark multithread score of 7382, and it holds a 2 percent advantage over the Intel Core i7-3770. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has no recorded benchmark scores, but its specifications indicate a high-performance desktop part. The 5.40 GHz boost clock, 32 MB L3 cache, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 5 support position it for demanding workloads, and its 65 TDP reflects a design that prioritizes performance over efficiency.

For a builder selecting between the two, the choice depends on the workload. The Core 3 N350 is the only one with confirmed benchmark data, and its scores show it handles data compression, integer math, and multithreaded tasks reasonably well for a mobile processor. The Ryzen Embedded 9600X lacks measured scores, so its performance cannot be quantified, but the architecture differences are stark. The 4 nm process node, dual-channel DDR5 support, ECC memory support, and unlocked multiplier on the AMD part are features suited to embedded desktop applications that require reliability and throughput. The single-channel memory and Gen 3 PCIe on the Intel part limit its bandwidth, while the 7 TDP makes it the clear choice for power-constrained environments. The recorded data supports the Core 3 N350 as a measured, efficient mobile option, while the Ryzen Embedded 9600X remains an unmeasured but specification-heavy desktop option.