AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X vs Intel Processor 300 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts of the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X versus the Intel Processor 300?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The Intel Processor 300 has no boost clock listed in the database.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Processor 300 uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X supports DDR5 only, whereas the Intel Processor 300 supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which chip includes ECC memory support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor 300 does not.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X has a TDP of 170 watts, while the Intel Processor 300 has a TDP of 46 watts.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X belongs to the 9000 series and uses the Granite Ridge codename. Its generation is listed as Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5 (Granite Ridge)), which indicates the Zen 5 microarchitecture. The processor is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 16,630 million and a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². It uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform.

The Intel Processor 300 is built on the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-S codename. Its generation is listed as Intel Processor (Raptor Lake). It uses a 10 nm process from Intel and has a die size of 163 mm². The socket is Intel Socket 1700.

The cache structures differ substantially. The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel chip also has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but it has 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core and only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. This gives the AMD processor a much larger total cache pool, particularly at the L3 level.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X includes Radeon Graphics as integrated graphics, while the Intel Processor 300 uses UHD Graphics 710. The AMD chip supports PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), and the Intel chip also supports PCIe Gen 5 but with 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel processor does not.

Memory support also differs. The AMD chip supports DDR5 in dual-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD side.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors, and neither chip has individual benchmark scores listed. The average benchmark score for both is zero, and both have a percentile ranking of 50 against all CPUs. No nearest rivals are listed for either part.

Because there are no measured benchmark values, the quantitative comparison must rely on the architectural and specification data available. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X offers 16 cores and 32 threads versus 2 cores and 4 threads for the Intel Processor 300. That represents an 8x difference in core count and an 8x difference in thread count. The base clock of the AMD chip is 4.30 GHz compared to 3.90 GHz for the Intel chip, a 0.40 GHz advantage. The AMD chip also has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Intel chip has no boost clock listed.

The L3 cache difference is substantial: 64 MB on the AMD chip versus 6 MB on the Intel chip. The AMD chip also has a much higher TDP at 170 watts versus 46 watts, which aligns with its larger core configuration. The AMD chip uses a smaller 4 nm process, while the Intel chip uses a 10 nm process. The AMD chip has a transistor count of 16,630 million, whereas the Intel chip has no transistor count recorded.

In terms of platform features, the AMD chip supports ECC memory, while the Intel chip does not. The AMD chip has 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and the Intel chip has 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier, and the Intel chip is locked.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X | Intel Processor 300 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 2 |

| Threads | 32 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 4.30 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | None listed |

| TDP | 170 W | 46 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Raptor Lake-S |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | None listed |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 163 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 1.25 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | None listed |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | 100-000001277E | SRN3J |

| Release Date | 2025-10-06 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | $82 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X wins on every core-related metric. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, which is 8x the core count and 8x the thread count of the Intel Processor 300. It also has a higher base clock of 4.30 GHz versus 3.90 GHz, plus a boost clock of 5.70 GHz that the Intel chip does not list. The L3 cache of 64 MB is more than 10x the 6 MB on the Intel chip. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not, and it has more PCIe Gen 5 lanes at 28 versus 16. The unlocked multiplier on the AMD chip allows overclocking, while the Intel chip is locked.

The Intel Processor 300 wins on power efficiency and platform flexibility. Its TDP of 46 watts is much lower than the 170 watts of the AMD chip, which indicates a far smaller thermal and power footprint. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD chip is limited to DDR5. The Intel chip has a larger L2 cache per core at 1.25 MB versus 1 MB on the AMD chip. The Intel chip also has an earlier release date of 2024-01-07 compared to 2025-10-06 for the AMD chip. The Intel chip has a recorded launch MSRP of $82, while no launch MSRP is listed for the AMD chip.

The Intel chip also has a larger die size of 163 mm² compared to 2x 70.6 mm² for the AMD chip, though the AMD chip uses a smaller process node and has a much higher transistor count. The Intel chip uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, while the AMD chip uses AMD Socket AM5.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors designed for very different roles. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X is a high-core-count, high-thread-count part with 16 cores, 32 threads, a 5.70 GHz boost clock, and 64 MB of L3 cache. It carries a 170 watt TDP and uses the AM5 socket with DDR5 memory support and ECC capability. The Intel Processor 300 is a 2-core, 4-thread part with a 3.90 GHz base clock, 6 MB of shared L3 cache, and a 46 watt TDP. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5, uses the LGA 1700 socket, and has a locked multiplier.

Benchmark results are absent for both chips, so the comparison is structural rather than performance-based. The AMD chip is overwhelmingly ahead in parallel compute resources: 8x the cores, 8x the threads, over 10x the L3 cache, and a faster base clock. It also has a boost clock, ECC memory support, more PCIe lanes, and an unlocked multiplier. The Intel chip offers a lower power envelope, dual memory type support, and a smaller platform footprint.

The recorded data indicates the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X should be selected for workloads that need high thread counts, large cache capacity, and ECC reliability. The Intel Processor 300 should be selected for low-power, low-complexity systems where the 46 watt TDP and DDR4 compatibility are the deciding factors. The Intel chip also has the advantage of an earlier release date and a listed launch MSRP of $82. No benchmark data exists to compare actual performance, so the choice rests entirely on the architectural and feature differences recorded in the database.