AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 vs Intel Core i3-8145U Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U boosts to 3.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 tops out at 3.10 GHz. That is a difference of 0.80 GHz in Intel's favor.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i3-8145U does not. This is a key differentiator for embedded and reliability-focused workloads.

Q: Which processor is built on a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U uses a 10 nm process from Intel, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. Intel's node is smaller, which typically contributes to its efficiency advantage.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U scores 3196 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 14.8% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600's score of 2784.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-8145U includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 620. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The Intel Core i3-8145U is marked as end-of-life, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 is still an active production part.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-8145U and AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 take fundamentally different architectural paths. Intel's part belongs to the Whiskey Lake family, specifically Whiskey Lake-U, and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. AMD's chip uses the original Zen architecture, codenamed Banded Kestrel, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Intel's newer and denser process node gives it an efficiency edge, even though both chips target mobile and embedded applications.

Both processors have 2 cores and 4 threads, so the parallel workload ceiling is identical in thread count. The differences show up in cache hierarchy and memory features. Intel allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD allocates 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and also 4 MB of shared L3. AMD's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches are typical of the Zen design, but the total L3 is the same at 4 MB.

Memory support is where the two diverge in a meaningful way for embedded buyers. Both run DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with identical 38.4 GB/s theoretical bandwidth. However, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 supports ECC memory, a critical feature for data integrity in industrial and server-like workloads. The Intel Core i3-8145U does not support ECC. This single feature often determines which platform is viable for a given deployment.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Intel chip provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD part provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Intel processor has integrated UHD Graphics 620, while the AMD chip has no integrated graphics at all, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for any display output. The Intel chip also carries a transistor count of 3,500 million and a die size of 148 mm², while the AMD chip's transistor count and die size are not listed in the database.

The Intel part is end-of-life, having been released in September 2018, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 was released in February 2020 and remains active. Intel's launch MSRP is $281; AMD's launch MSRP is not recorded.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture: the Intel Core i3-8145U wins every benchmark in this comparison. It takes all five head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 14.5% to 15%. If raw compute performance is the only consideration, the Intel chip is the straightforward choice.

However, the verdict is not quite that simple. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 offers ECC memory support, which the Intel chip lacks. For embedded applications where data corruption is unacceptable, ECC support can be a decisive factor that overrides a 15% performance deficit. The AMD part is also still in active production, while the Intel chip is end-of-life, which matters for long-term supply and design-in decisions.

The Intel Core i3-8145U is for buyers who want maximum single-threaded and multi-threaded performance in a low-power mobile package, and who do not require ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 is for embedded system designers who need ECC reliability and an active production lifecycle, and who can accept lower benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several direct differences between the two processors:

• Base clock: Intel Core i3-8145U runs at 2.10 GHz, AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 at 2.60 GHz. The AMD chip has a 0.50 GHz base clock advantage.
• Boost clock: Intel reaches 3.90 GHz, AMD reaches 3.10 GHz. Intel has a 0.80 GHz boost advantage.
• TDP: Intel is rated at 15 W, AMD at 25 W. Intel draws 10 W less under its thermal design point.
• Process node: Intel uses 10 nm, AMD uses 14 nm.
• Foundry: Intel fabricates its own chip, AMD uses GlobalFoundries.
• L1 cache: Intel has 64 KB per core, AMD has 96 KB per core.
• L2 cache: Intel has 256 KB per core, AMD has 512 KB per core.
• L3 cache: Both have 4 MB shared.
• ECC support: Intel does not support ECC, AMD does.
• PCIe lanes: Intel provides 16 Gen 3 lanes, AMD provides 8 Gen 3 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: Intel includes UHD Graphics 620, AMD has no integrated graphics.
• Socket: Intel uses BGA 1528, AMD uses Socket FP5.
• Production status: Intel is end-of-life, AMD is active.
• Release date: Intel launched September 2018, AMD February 2020.
• Transistors: AMD lists 3,500 million transistors; Intel does not list a figure.
• Die size: AMD lists 148 mm² die size; Intel does not list one.

Memory support, memory bus, memory bandwidth, core count, thread count, market segment, and multiplier lock status are identical between the two.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every recorded head-to-head test result favors the Intel Core i3-8145U. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where Intel scores 322 against AMD's 280, a 15% advantage. The other margins are remarkably consistent: 14.8% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1342 versus 1169), 14.5% in Cinebench R20 single-core (189 versus 165), and 14.8% in Cinebench R23 single-core (451 versus 393) and multi-core (3196 versus 2784).

The pattern is unusually tight across the board. The Intel chip does not just win by a wide gap in one test and a narrow one in another, it wins by nearly identical margins in every workload. The single-core tests show the same story as the multi-core tests, meaning the 15% lead is consistent across both per-thread performance and full load.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600's higher base clock of 2.60 GHz does not translate into a benchmark win. Despite starting 0.50 GHz higher than Intel's base, the AMD chip loses every test. The benchmark data shows Intel's 3.90 GHz boost clock and architectural efficiency carry it to victory in every metric.

For context, the Intel Core i3-8145U sits at the 25th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 941. Its nearest rivals are Intel Core i5-4330M (average score 938, 0.3% behind Intel), Intel Core i7-2715QE (942 average, 0.1% behind), AMD Athlon X4 860K (943 average, 0.2% behind), and AMD A8-7670K (944 average, 0.4% behind Intel). The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 sits at the 26th percentile with an average benchmark score of 958. Its nearest rivals are AMD Opteron 4386 (957 average score, 0.1% behind AMD), Intel Core i7-950 (957 average, 0.1% behind), AMD Athlon X4 870K (956 average, 0.2% behind), and Intel Xeon W3550 (956 average, 0.2% behind).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-8145U wins all five recorded head-to-head benchmarks. It wins multi-core rendering across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. It wins single-core tests in R20 and R23. There is no benchmark category in the recorded data where the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 comes out ahead.

So where does the AMD chip actually win? It wins on features, not on benchmark scores. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip cannot offer. For a NAS, a network appliance, a storage controller, or any industrial system where a single-bit memory error causes corruption, ECC support is the deciding factor. The AMD part also remains in active production, which matters for a system integrator that needs to guarantee the same processor is available for years after design-in. The Intel chip, by contrast, is end-of-life.

The AMD chip also has the higher base clock at 2.60 GHz, which means it will sustain that frequency under load in systems with sufficient cooling, and it has a larger L1 and L2 cache per core. But the recorded benchmark data shows none of those advantages translate into a compute win. The AMD part is the right pick only when its embedded-specific features, ECC memory and active production status, are non-negotiable requirements, or when the lower PCIe lane count of 8 is sufficient and the absence of integrated graphics is not a problem.

The Intel Core i3-8145U is the right pick for everything else. It delivers a 14.8% to 15% performance lead in every recorded benchmark, uses 10 W less TDP at 15 W versus 25 W, includes integrated UHD Graphics 620, provides 16 PCIe lanes versus 8, and was launched in 2018 with a launch MSRP of $281. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, so direct pricing comparisons are not possible. For a mobile or embedded design where ECC is not required, the Intel chip wins on both raw compute and power envelope.