AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X vs Intel Core 5 210H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains benchmark results for the Intel Core 5 210H across multiple Cinebench and Passmark tests. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has no benchmark scores listed in the database, which limits direct numerical comparison. The Intel Core 5 210H scores 1,757 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 247 in single-core, 6,504 in R20 multi-core and 918 in single-core, and 11,830 in R23 multi-core with 1,771 in single-core.

Passmark results for the Intel Core 5 210H show a multi-thread score of 18,252 and a single-thread score of 3,539. The data compression test returns 217,805, floating point math scores 45,057, integer math scores 61,503, and extended instructions score 13,370. The random string sorting test produces 23,451, data encryption scores 12,187, and the find prime numbers test returns 53.

The average benchmark score for the Intel Core 5 210H is 24,872, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Core i7-13620H averages 24,911 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX averages 24,822 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i7-11850H averages 24,935 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F averages 24,964 (0.4% ahead). These deltas are minimal, indicating the Intel Core 5 210H sits within a narrow performance band among comparable processors.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has an average benchmark score of zero and sits at the 50th percentile, with no recorded rivals. Benchmark results in the database show no wins for either processor in head-to-head comparisons, as the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. The data therefore cannot support a numerical performance comparison between these two specific processors; only the Intel Core 5 210H has measurable results.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X uses the Granite Ridge codename from the Ryzen Embedded Zen 5 generation, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 16,630 million transistors across a 2x 70.6 mm² die configuration. The Intel Core 5 210H uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-H codename from the Core 5 Raptor Lake Refresh generation, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel with no transistor count or die size recorded.

The AMD processor provides 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel processor provides 8 cores and 12 threads. The AMD base clock is 4.30 GHz with a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, compared to the Intel base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The AMD chip carries a TDP of 170 watts, whereas the Intel chip carries a TDP of 45 watts.

Cache layouts differ substantially. Both use 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD processor uses 1 MB of L2 per core with 64 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel processor uses 2 MB of L2 per core with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part supports DDR5 memory only with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and no recorded bandwidth figure.

ECC memory support is present on the AMD processor but absent on the Intel processor. PCIe lanes also differ: the AMD processor offers Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel processor offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The AMD processor includes Radeon Graphics integrated, the Intel processor includes Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. The AMD multiplier is unlocked; the Intel multiplier is locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 210H is the only processor with recorded benchmark data, so its wins are measurable across all tested workloads. The single-thread Passmark score of 3,539 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,771 indicate strong performance in lightly threaded tasks such as general desktop responsiveness and applications that rely on a single core. The multi-thread scores of 18,252 in Passmark and 11,830 in Cinebench R23 show capability in parallel workloads like video encoding, compilation, and rendering.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has no benchmark scores in the database, so its wins cannot be quantified. However, architecture data indicates potential advantages in high-throughput scenarios. The 16-core, 32-thread configuration with 64 MB of L3 cache suggests a design aimed at sustained multi-core workloads in embedded environments. The 170-watt TDP and socket AM5 platform point toward a part that can draw substantial power for heavy compute tasks.

The Intel processor's 45-watt TDP and mobile BGA 1744 socket indicate a power-conscious design suited for laptop or compact mobile systems. The AMD processor's unlocked multiplier and embedded market segment suggest configurability for specific industrial or server-like deployments. The Intel part supports DDR4 memory, which can ease upgrades in existing systems, while the AMD part requires DDR5.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X | Intel Core 5 210H |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Threads | 32 | 12 |

| Base clock | 4.30 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 170 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Raptor Lake-H |

| Generation | Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5) | Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 2 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 64 MB | 12 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 5, 28 lanes | Gen 5, 8 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 48EU |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $342 |

The Intel Core 5 210H has a recorded launch MSRP of $342. The AMD processor has no launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X boosts to 5.70 GHz. The Intel Core 5 210H boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 210H does not.

Q: What memory types are supported?

A: The AMD processor supports DDR5 only. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has a TDP of 170 watts. The Intel Core 5 210H has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core 5 210H?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H has an average benchmark score of 24,872, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs. Its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, scores 24,822, a 0.2% difference.

The Verdict

The database shows a clear asymmetry between these two processors. The Intel Core 5 210H has a full set of benchmark results, an average score of 24,872, and a 77th percentile ranking. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Core i7-13620H, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, Intel Core i7-11850H, and AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, all fall within a 0.4% delta, confirming the Intel part competes at a specific performance tier with strong consistency across multi-thread workloads.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking reflects an absence of measured data rather than a performance assessment. The architecture suggests a very different design: 16 cores, 32 threads, 64 MB of L3 cache, 4 nm process, and 170-watt TDP indicate a high-throughput embedded processor. The Intel part, with 8 cores, 12 threads, 12 MB of L3 cache, and 45-watt TDP, targets mobile systems with lower power envelopes.

For users with measurable data, the Intel Core 5 210H offers verified performance across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and Passmark tests, with a launch MSRP of $342. For the AMD processor, the database provides no performance evidence, so any selection must rely on architectural specifications alone. The AMD part appears designed for embedded environments requiring many cores, high bandwidth, and ECC support, while the Intel part suits mobile deployments where power efficiency and established benchmark performance matter. The recorded data does not permit a direct performance winner, as the AMD processor lacks any benchmark scores.