AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 vs Intel Core i3-1110G4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent pattern across all five Cinebench comparisons: the Intel Core i3-1110G4 wins every single head-to-head test. There are zero wins for the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600, and five wins for Intel. The margins are not trivial either, they cluster tightly around 13 percent.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel part scores 322 against AMD's 280. That is a 13 percent deficit for the AMD chip. The same 13 percent gap appears in Cinebench R20 multicore, where Intel posts 1344 and AMD posts 1169. Moving to Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 3202 versus AMD's 2784, a 13.1 percent difference. The single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, Intel leads 189 to 165, a 12.7 percent margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 452 against 393, again 13.1 percent ahead.

The consistency of these deltas is striking. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the relative gap barely moves. That suggests the Intel processor's advantage is not tied to a specific workload characteristic, but rather to a general performance edge across the board. The AMD chip never comes within single digits of Intel in any test. The closest margin is the 12.7 percent in R20 single-core, while the widest is 13.1 percent in both R23 tests. Both processors have the same core and thread counts, two cores and four threads, so the gap is not about raw parallelism. It is about how efficiently each core executes the workload.

The average benchmark score in the database places AMD at 958, with its nearest rivals being the AMD Opteron 4386 at 957, the Intel Core i7-950 at 957, the AMD Athlon X4 870K at 956, and the Intel Xeon W3550 at 956. The Intel i3-1110G4 averages 945, with rivals including the AMD A8-7670K at 944, the AMD Phenom II X6 1045T at 946, the Intel Xeon X5560 at 946, and the Intel Pentium Gold G5400T at 946. Despite the Intel chip winning every head-to-head benchmark, its average score across the database is actually slightly lower than AMD's average. The delta between the two averages is only about 13 points, roughly 1.4 percent difference. This is a curious situation: the head-to-head data shows a clear Intel advantage, but the broader average score database places them nearly equal in percentile terms. The AMD part sits at the 26th percentile versus all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 25th percentile. The database's broader view flattens the gap, while direct comparisons preserve it.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparisons?

A: No. The head-to-head data records zero wins for AMD. The Intel Core i3-1110G4 wins all five tests, with deltas ranging from 12.7 percent to 13.1 percent.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap between the two processors?

A: In Cinebench R20 single-core, Intel scores 189 versus AMD's 165, a 12.7 percent difference. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 452 against 393, a 13.1 percent difference. The Intel part leads by roughly 13 percent in single-core across both available single-core tests.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-1110G4 lists a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 lists 3.10 GHz. The base clock for Intel is listed as 1800.00 MHz, and AMD's base clock is 2.60 GHz.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 has an average benchmark score of 958. The Intel Core i3-1110G4 has an average benchmark score of 945.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 supports ECC memory, the Intel Core i3-1110G4 does not.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R15 multicore performance?

A: Intel scores 322 against AMD's 280, a 13 percent deficit for AMD. The Intel processor wins the test with a delta of 13 percent.

Q: Do the two processors differ in PCIe generation?

A: Yes. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes CPU-only, the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes CPU-only.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i3-1110G4 includes Iris Xe Graphics G4 integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 lists no integrated graphics in the recorded data.

Q: When was each processor released according to the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 records a release date of 2020-02-24T17:00:00.000Z. The Intel Core i3-1110G4 records a release date of 2020-09-01T17:00:00.000Z.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 lists a TDP of 25 watts. The Intel Core i3-1110G4 lists a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i3-1110G4 lists 6 MB shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 lists 4 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 lists 38.4 GB/s, the Intel Core i3-1110G4 lists 59.7 GB/s.

Where Each One Wins

The data does not give the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 a single head-to-head benchmark win. Every Cinebench test in the comparison favors the Intel Core i3-1110G4. Therefore, in pure compute performance, the Intel part is the clear choice. The Intel processor leads in both single-core and multi-core rendering workloads, with margins consistently above 12 percent. For applications that rely on Cinebench-style rendering performance, the Intel chip is simply faster.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 does have areas where it holds an advantage in the specification data, even if those do not translate to benchmark wins. It supports ECC memory, the Intel chip does not. That makes the AMD part potentially relevant for workloads where error-correcting memory is a requirement, such as certain embedded or reliability-sensitive deployments. The AMD chip also has a lower release date in the database, appearing earlier by several months. Its TDP is higher at 25 watts versus 15 watts, so it is not more power-efficient by that metric, but the ECC support is a distinguishing feature.

The Intel Core i3-1110G4 wins on memory bandwidth, listing 59.7 GB/s against AMD's 38.4 GB/s. It also has a larger L3 cache, 6 MB versus 4 MB, and a higher L2 cache per core, 1.25 MB per core versus 512 KB per core. The Intel part includes integrated graphics, which the AMD part lacks entirely. For systems that need a display output without a discrete GPU, that is a decisive advantage. The Intel chip also supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the AMD chip supports PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes. The higher boost clock, 3.90 GHz versus 3.10 GHz, aligns with its benchmark superiority.

For users prioritizing raw processing speed in rendering workloads, the Intel processor is the data-backed pick. For users who need ECC memory support, the AMD part is the only one of the two that offers it. For users who need integrated graphics, the Intel part is the only one that has it. The use-case split is clean: performance and features go to Intel, ECC support goes to AMD.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several core specifications. Both have 2 cores and 4 threads. Both support DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration. Both are aimed at the mobile market segment. Both are currently listed as active in production. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

The differences are substantial elsewhere. The base clock of the AMD part is 2.60 GHz, the Intel part is listed at 1800.00 MHz. The boost clock is 3.10 GHz for AMD and 3.90 GHz for Intel. TDP differs, AMD at 25 watts, Intel at 15 watts. The sockets are different: AMD Socket FP5 for AMD, Intel BGA 1598 for Intel. The process node differs, 14 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. The foundry is GlobalFoundries for AMD and Intel for Intel. The AMD chip has 3,500 million transistors and a die size of 148 mm², the Intel chip has no transistor count or die size recorded.

Cache configurations differ. L1 cache is the same at 96 KB per core. L2 cache is 512 KB per core for AMD and 1.25 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache is 4 MB shared for AMD and 6 MB shared for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s for AMD and 59.7 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory support is present on AMD, absent on Intel. PCIe support differs: Gen 3 with 8 lanes for AMD, Gen 4 with 16 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are absent on AMD and present on Intel as Iris Xe Graphics G4. The release dates differ, AMD in February 2020, Intel in September 2020.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 uses the Zen architecture, specifically the Zen (Banded Kestrel) generation within the Ryzen Embedded 1000 series. It is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core i3-1110G4 uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-U, with the Core i3 generation identified as Willow Cove-U. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is significant: 14 nm versus 10 nm, which likely contributes to the Intel part's lower TDP of 15 watts versus 25 watts despite higher performance.

The L2 cache per core is notably different. AMD provides 512 KB per core, Intel provides 1.25 MB per core. That is more than double the per-core L2 capacity. L3 cache also favors Intel, 6 MB shared versus 4 MB shared. The transistor count is recorded only for AMD at 3,500 million, and the die size only for AMD at 148 mm². The Intel part has no such figures in the database.

The memory bandwidth difference, 59.7 GB/s for Intel versus 38.4 GB/s for AMD, reflects the architectural generation gap. PCIe support also differs, with Intel offering Gen 4 and 16 lanes versus AMD's Gen 3 and 8 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on Intel only, with Iris Xe Graphics G4. The AMD part has no integrated graphics. ECC memory support is present on AMD only, a notable architectural feature for embedded reliability use cases.

The release timeline shows AMD arriving first in February 2020, with Intel following in September 2020. Both are active production parts. The architectural gap between Zen on 14 nm and Tiger Lake on 10 nm is visible in the benchmark deltas, with Intel consistently ahead by approximately 13 percent across all tested workloads.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous on performance: the Intel Core i3-1110G4 wins every head-to-head benchmark against the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600. The margins are consistent, between 12.7 percent and 13.1 percent across single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. If the primary selection criterion is compute performance in rendering workloads, the Intel processor is the correct pick. The Intel part also offers integrated graphics, higher memory bandwidth, a larger cache hierarchy, PCIe Gen 4, and a lower TDP. These are substantial advantages for most mobile or embedded system designs.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 does retain one clear differentiator: ECC memory support. For systems that require error-correcting memory, the AMD part is the only one of the two that satisfies that requirement. The AMD part also has a lower average benchmark score in the database at 958, slightly above Intel's 945, and a percentile ranking of 26 versus Intel's 25. That broader database context suggests the two are closer in general purpose performance than the head-to-head results imply, but the direct comparisons still favor Intel.

Who should pick the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600? A designer building a system where ECC memory is mandatory and where the absence of integrated graphics is acceptable, and where the 13 percent performance deficit is tolerable. Who should pick the Intel Core i3-1110G4? Anyone prioritizing raw performance, lower power draw, integrated graphics, faster memory bandwidth, or newer PCIe connectivity. The recorded data favors Intel in nearly every measurable category, with ECC support standing as the single clear reason to choose AMD.