AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 vs Intel Core i7-1160G7 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent, though modest, advantage for the Intel Core i7-1160G7 across every Cinebench workload in the comparison. In all six head-to-head tests, Intel wins, with delta percentages ranging from 1.8% to 2.0%. The narrowest margin appears in the multi-core and single-core R23 tests, where Intel leads by 1.8% in both, scoring 7343 against 7213 and 1036 against 1018, respectively. The widest single-test margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where Intel posts 104 versus 102, a 2% difference. These are not transformative gaps; they indicate a slight but repeatable performance edge for Intel in this specific suite.

The average benchmark scores place the two processors nearly level. Intel’s average is 2124, while AMD’s is 2086, a difference of 38 points, which is roughly 1.8%. Both chips sit at the 46th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning neither is positioned as a high-flyer in the broader performance distribution. Their nearest rivals reinforce this: Intel’s closest competitors include the Intel Atom C5125 (2122, delta 0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7520C (2127, delta -0.1%), the Intel Xeon E-2224G (2117, delta 0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 3 5300U (2135, delta -0.5%). For AMD, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-9350KF (2082, delta 0.2%), the Intel Xeon W-2123 (2079, delta 0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X (2094, delta -0.4%), and the Intel Core i3-8350K (2096, delta -0.5%). These peer groups show that both parts are clustered within a few points of each other and of several competing models, making the head-to-head difference more meaningful than the absolute scores might suggest.

Looking at the multi-core results specifically, Intel’s lead is steady but small. In R15, the score is 740 versus 726 (1.9% delta); in R20, it is 3084 versus 3029 (1.8% delta); in R23, it is 7343 versus 7213 (1.8% delta). The pattern is almost uniform, which suggests a consistent architectural or clock-related advantage rather than a workload-specific fluke. Single-core results mirror this: R15 at 104 versus 102 (2% delta), R20 at 435 versus 427 (1.9% delta), and R23 at 1036 versus 1018 (1.8% delta). No single test flips the result, and no test shows a delta larger than 2.0%. The data does not support a claim of dominance; it supports a claim of marginal, repeatable superiority for Intel in Cinebench.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-1160G7 wins in every benchmark category recorded, so the use-case split is straightforward: for Cinebench-based workloads, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, Intel has the edge. The single-core wins are notable because Intel achieves them with a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, compared to AMD’s base of 3.35 GHz and boost of 3.70 GHz. The higher boost clock likely explains the single-core advantage, but the multi-core wins are less intuitive given Intel’s lower base clock. The data suggests that Intel’s Tiger Lake architecture, with its 10 nm process, extracts more performance per clock in these tests than AMD’s Zen+ on a 12 nm node.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 does not win any of the six recorded benchmarks, so there is no measured workload where it comes out ahead in this comparison. However, the deltas are small enough that the AMD part remains competitive in absolute terms. For users running Cinebench R23 multi-core, the difference is 130 points, which is within the noise of many real-world workloads. The AMD chip does offer features that Intel lacks, such as ECC memory support and a larger PCIe lane count (16 Gen 3 lanes versus 4 Gen 4 lanes), but those are not reflected in Cinebench scores. In a pure performance-per-benchmark sense, Intel wins all six tests. In a system-level sense, the AMD part may be more suitable for embedded or server-like environments where ECC and I/O expandability matter more than a 1.8% Cinebench delta.

The average benchmark score of 2124 for Intel versus 2086 for AMD places both in the same percentile (46th), so neither is a performance outlier. The difference is consistent with the head-to-head results: Intel is slightly faster, but not enough to change its standing relative to all other CPUs. For workloads that resemble Cinebench’s rendering tasks, Intel is the pick. For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the AMD part has a theoretical advantage (51.2 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s), but no benchmark in this dataset measures that directly.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i7-1160G7 scores 1036, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 scores 1018, a 1.8% difference.

Q: How much faster is the Intel part in multi-core Cinebench R20?

A: Intel scores 3084, AMD scores 3029, giving Intel a 1.8% lead.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each CPU?

A: Intel’s average is 2124, and AMD’s is 2086. Both sit at the 46th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No, the recorded data shows 6 wins for Intel and 0 wins for AMD across all six Cinebench tests.

Q: What is the closest head-to-head margin between the two?

A: The smallest deltas are 1.8%, seen in R20 multi-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. The largest is 2.0% in R15 single-core.

Q: How do the two compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: Intel’s closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 7520C with a delta of -0.1%, and AMD’s closest rival is the Intel Core i3-9350KF with a delta of 0.2%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Intel Core i7-1160G7 has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 runs at 3.35 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. Intel’s TDP is 15 watts, AMD’s is 45 watts, a substantial difference that reflects their intended market segments: Intel is listed as Mobile, AMD as Desktop. The socket types also diverge: Intel uses BGA 1598, AMD uses Socket FP5.

Cache layouts are markedly different. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and only 4 MB of shared L3. Despite having a larger L3 pool, Intel’s total cache hierarchy is not necessarily larger in all levels, but the L3 difference (12 MB versus 4 MB) is significant. Memory support differs as well: Intel supports LPDDR4X, AMD supports DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the bandwidth figures are not equal: Intel lists 34.1 GB/s, AMD lists 51.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part but not on the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. Intel offers Gen 4 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while AMD offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This is a major I/O capacity difference, favoring AMD for systems that need more expansion slots or NVMe drives. The integrated graphics also differ: Intel has Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 with 96 execution units, AMD has Radeon Vega 8. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not officially supported on either. The launch MSRP for Intel is $426; AMD has no listed launch MSRP. Production status also differs: Intel is end-of-life, AMD is active.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is generational and process-driven. Intel’s Core i7-1160G7 is built on Tiger Lake, specifically Tiger Lake-U, using a 10 nm process from Intel’s own foundry. The die size is 144 mm². The architecture generation is listed as Core i7 (Willow Cove-U), indicating the Willow Cove microarchitecture. AMD’s Ryzen Embedded R2544 is a Zen+ part, codenamed Picasso, built on a 12 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The die size is 210 mm², and the transistor count is 4,940 million. Intel does not list a transistor count in the database.

The core counts are identical: 4 cores and 8 threads on both. The L1 cache per core is larger on AMD (96 KB versus 80 KB), and the L2 cache per core is larger on Intel (1.25 MB versus 512 KB). The L3 cache is 12 MB shared on Intel versus 4 MB shared on AMD. These cache differences likely contribute to Intel’s benchmark edge, particularly in multi-core tests where a larger shared cache can reduce latency. However, AMD’s memory bandwidth advantage (51.2 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) does not translate into a Cinebench win, suggesting that the rendering workloads are more sensitive to core efficiency and cache than to raw memory throughput.

The market segments reflect different design goals. Intel is a mobile part with a 15 W TDP, released in September 2020. AMD is a desktop embedded part with a 45 W TDP, released in September 2022. The process node difference (10 nm versus 12 nm) and the architecture generation (Willow Cove versus Zen+) explain the performance parity despite the two-year release gap. Intel’s part is smaller in die area (144 mm² versus 210 mm²) and uses fewer transistors, but it achieves higher clock speeds and better benchmark scores. AMD’s part offers ECC, more PCIe lanes, and higher memory bandwidth, which are features suited to embedded and industrial use cases rather than peak Cinebench performance.

The integrated graphics also reflect different strategies. Intel’s Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 with 96 EUs is a more modern GPU architecture, likely providing better media and display capabilities for a mobile chip. AMD’s Radeon Vega 8 is an older GPU design but is paired with a higher TDP, which may allow sustained GPU performance in embedded applications. Neither part has a 3D V-Cache option, and both use dual-channel memory buses. The data does not include results for integrated graphics performance, so any GPU comparison would be speculative. The recorded benchmarks only cover Cinebench, which is CPU-focused, so the architectural differences that matter most in this comparison are the cache sizes, clock speeds, and process nodes. Intel’s larger L3 and higher boost clock appear to be the decisive factors in its six head-to-head wins.