AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G vs Intel Celeron G6900TE Comparison

The Intel Celeron G6900TE and AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G are two low-power processors aimed at very different corners of the market, yet the benchmark data shows they are surprisingly close in raw compute performance. The Intel part wins all five head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, but the margins are razor-thin, ranging from 0.4% to 0.6%. The AMD chip counters with a dramatically lower 10W TDP, making the choice between them far more about platform priorities and power envelopes than about which one posts a higher score.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture: the Celeron G6900TE is the faster processor in every single benchmark recorded. Its wins in the head-to-head comparisons are consistent, though the deltas are minor. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel chip scores 2687 against the AMD’s 2670, a 0.6% advantage. The single-core results follow the same pattern, with the Celeron posting 379 versus 377 in R23 single-core. If pure compute throughput is the sole criterion, the Intel part is the pick.

However, the Ryzen Embedded R1305G tells a different story through its power characteristics. With a 10W TDP compared to the Intel’s 35W, the AMD chip consumes a fraction of the power budget while delivering nearly identical performance. For fanless designs, battery-powered embedded systems, or any deployment where heat dissipation and energy draw are critical constraints, the Ryzen part is the logical choice. The data shows a performance gap that is almost negligible in real-world terms, but a power gap that is substantial.

The market positioning reinforces this split. The Celeron is a desktop part on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, while the Ryzen is a mobile/embedded chip on the AMD Socket FP5. The benchmark percentile scores are close — 25th for Intel, 24th for AMD — indicating both sit in the same low-performance tier globally. Choose Intel for a standard desktop build with a bit more headroom; choose AMD for ultra-low-power embedded applications where the 10W envelope is non-negotiable.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Celeron G6900TE is built on the Alder Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node, fabricated by Intel itself. It features 2 cores and 2 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and no boost clock listed. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm node from GlobalFoundries, also with 2 cores but 4 threads, running at a 1500 MHz base clock with a 2.80 GHz boost.

Cache configurations diverge notably. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, while the AMD chip offers 96 KB of L1 per core but only 512 KB of L2 per core. Both share 4 MB of L3 cache. The thread count difference is significant: the AMD’s four threads versus the Intel’s two suggests better handling of parallel workloads, yet the benchmark results show the Intel chip still edges ahead in multicore tests, likely due to its higher base clock and newer architecture.

Memory support differs as well. The Celeron supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ryzen is limited to DDR4. The AMD part does list a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel chip. PCIe capabilities are a major divergence: the Intel chip supports Gen 5, whereas the AMD part is limited to Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ, with the Intel featuring UHD Graphics 710 and the AMD sporting Radeon Vega 3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark sweep is a clean one for Intel, but the margins invite scrutiny. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Celeron scores 270 against the Ryzen’s 269, a 0.4% delta. The R20 multicore test shows a slightly larger gap: 1128 versus 1121, a 0.6% difference. The single-core R20 result is identical in percentage terms, 159 to 158, again favoring Intel by 0.6%.

The R23 tests reinforce the trend. In multicore, the Intel chip posts 2687 versus 2670, a 0.6% win. The single-core R23 result is 379 for Intel and 377 for AMD, a 0.5% margin. Across all five tests, the Intel processor never loses, but it also never wins by more than 0.6%. This suggests the two chips are effectively in the same performance class, with the Celeron holding a slight edge that could be attributed to its newer architecture or higher base clock.

The average benchmark scores align with this interpretation. The Intel part has an average benchmark score of 925, while the AMD sits at 919. The nearest rivals for the Intel chip include the Intel Core i3-4350T at 926 (a -0.2% delta) and the AMD FX-4320 at 921 (a 0.4% delta). For the AMD chip, the nearest rival is the AMD PRO A10-9700E at 919 (0% delta) and the Intel Pentium Gold G6405T at 915 (0.5% delta). These rival comparisons show both chips clustering tightly with other low-end processors from the same era.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal where the two parts diverge most clearly. The process node is a major difference: Intel uses 10 nm, while AMD uses 14 nm. The AMD chip lists its transistor count at 3,500 million and a die size of 148 mm², figures not provided for the Intel part. The base clocks are starkly different, with Intel at 2.40 GHz and AMD at 1500 MHz, though the AMD chip compensates with a 2.80 GHz boost clock that the Intel part lacks entirely.

Thread counts differ, with Intel at 2 threads and AMD at 4. The TDP is the most dramatic specification split: 35W for Intel versus 10W for AMD. Sockets are incompatible, being Intel Socket 1700 and AMD Socket FP5 respectively. The PCIe generation differs (Gen 5 for Intel, Gen 3 for AMD), and memory support varies (DDR4/DDR5 for Intel, DDR4 only for AMD). The integrated GPUs are different models, and the market segments differ — Desktop for Intel, Mobile for AMD.

Release dates are also distinct, with the Intel chip launching on January 3, 2022, and the AMD part on February 24, 2020. Both parts are marked as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are SRL68 for Intel and YE1305C9T2OFG for AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Celeron G6900TE wins all single-core benchmarks, but by very slim margins. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 159 versus 158 (0.6% delta), and in R23 single-core, it scores 379 versus 377 (0.5% delta).

Q: How do the two chips compare in multicore workloads?

A: The Intel chip wins all multicore tests, including Cinebench R23 multicore with a score of 2687 versus 2670 (0.6% delta). Despite having only 2 threads compared to AMD’s 4, the Intel part still edges ahead.

Q: What is the most significant specification difference between them?

A: The TDP is the largest gap: the Intel part draws 35W while the AMD part draws only 10W. The AMD chip also uses a 14 nm process versus Intel’s 10 nm, and supports 4 threads versus Intel’s 2.

Q: Does the AMD chip have any advantage in memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the Ryzen Embedded R1305G lists a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel Celeron G6900TE. However, the Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD part is limited to DDR4.

Q: Which processor is better for a low-power embedded system?

A: The data clearly favors the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G for such use cases due to its 10W TDP, which is less than a third of the Intel’s 35W. The performance difference is minimal, making the power savings a decisive factor.

Q: How do these processors rank globally against all CPUs?

A: The Intel Celeron G6900TE sits in the 25th percentile, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G sits in the 24th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 925 and 919, respectively, placing them in the same low-performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Celeron G6900TE wins in every recorded benchmark, making it the clear choice for scenarios where maximum compute performance is required, even if the margin is small. Its 35W TDP suggests it can sustain higher clocks under load, and its support for DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 5 provides a more modern platform foundation. The desktop market segment also implies it is intended for systems where power draw is less of a concern. For a basic desktop PC, HTPC, or any build where the 35W envelope is acceptable, the Intel part offers slightly better performance across the board.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1305G wins decisively on power efficiency. Its 10W TDP is a massive advantage for embedded applications, fanless designs, or mobile deployments where heat and battery life are paramount. The 4 threads provide better parallelism on paper, even if the benchmarks show the Intel chip still comes out ahead. The mobile market segment and the smaller power footprint make it the obvious pick for industrial controllers, thin clients, or any system running on a tight power budget. The 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is a documented advantage that could matter in memory-sensitive workloads. In short, the Intel chip wins on raw performance, while the AMD chip wins on efficiency and embedded suitability. The benchmark data shows the performance gap is negligible, but the power gap is not.