AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 vs Intel Core i7-5950HQ Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a remarkably consistent picture across all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons: the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 wins every single test, and by nearly identical margins. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ does not take a single victory in any of the Cinebench iterations, whether multi-core or single-core workloads are examined.

Starting with multi-core performance, the AMD part leads by 9.6% in Cinebench R15 with a score of 726 versus 656 for the Intel chip. The same test in Cinebench R20 shows a 9.7% gap, with AMD scoring 3029 and Intel scoring 2736. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 reaches 7213 while the Intel Core i7-5950HQ manages 6516, again a 9.7% difference. These margins are not coincidental; they reflect a consistent architectural advantage that persists across software generations.

Single-core results follow the same pattern. The AMD processor wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 102 points against Intel's 92, a 9.8% advantage. In Cinebench R20 single-core, AMD scores 427 versus Intel's 386, a 9.6% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows AMD at 1018 and Intel at 920, another 9.6% margin. No single-core test deviates from this narrow band of 9.6% to 9.8% superiority for the AMD part.

The consistency of these deltas is notable. Across six tests, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 maintains an advantage between 9.6% and 9.8% in every workload. This uniformity suggests that the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific, driven by the fundamental characteristics of each processor's design rather than by particular instruction mixes.

Looking at broader context, both CPUs sit in similar percentile territory. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ ranks at the 47th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 sits at the 46th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are also close: Intel averages 2158 across its recorded tests, while AMD averages 2086. Yet the head-to-head Cinebench results tell a different story, with AMD winning each specific comparison by roughly 10%.

The Intel part's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i5-10200H with an average score of 2154 (a 0.2% delta), the Intel Core i5-7640X at 2167 (-0.4% delta), the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X at 2148 (0.5% delta), and the Intel Core i5-1145G7E at 2174 (-0.7% delta). The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-9350KF at 2082 (0.2% delta), the Intel Xeon W-2123 at 2079 (0.3% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X at 2094 (-0.4% delta), and the Intel Core i3-8350K at 2096 (-0.5% delta). These rival groupings confirm that both processors compete in the same performance tier, yet within that tier the AMD part consistently outperforms the Intel part in direct comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The data provides no ambiguity: the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 wins in every benchmark category where both processors were tested. There are zero wins recorded for the Intel Core i7-5950HQ across the six head-to-head comparisons. This means the AMD part is the superior choice for multi-threaded rendering workloads, single-threaded responsiveness, and everything in between.

For users prioritizing multi-core throughput, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or software compilation, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 delivers its multi-core wins with margins of 9.6% to 9.7% across all three Cinebench versions. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 7213 versus 6516 represents a 697-point absolute difference, which is substantial for sustained productivity tasks.

For single-core performance, which matters in gaming, legacy applications, and lightly-threaded workloads, the AMD part again leads by 9.6% to 9.8%. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1018 versus 920 demonstrates that even in workloads that cannot utilize multiple threads, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 holds a clear edge.

The Intel Core i7-5950HQ does have its own strengths in the broader database context. Its average benchmark score of 2158 is actually higher than the AMD part's 2086, and it sits at the 47th percentile versus AMD's 46th. However, these aggregate statistics include Geekbench results for the Intel part that are not recorded for the AMD part, so direct comparisons across all benchmarks are not possible. In the tests where both processors appear, the AMD part wins without exception.

Other differentiators could influence a purchasing decision. The Intel processor features Iris Pro Graphics 6200 integrated graphics, while the AMD part includes Radeon Vega 8. The AMD processor supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Intel chip. The AMD part also uses DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the Intel part's DDR3 support at 29.9 GB/s. These factors may matter more than raw benchmark scores for certain embedded or server applications.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 wins all three single-core Cinebench tests. It scores 102 versus 92 in Cinebench R15, 427 versus 386 in Cinebench R20, and 1018 versus 920 in Cinebench R23, with margins between 9.6% and 9.8% in each case.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 leads in all multi-core tests. Cinebench R15 shows 726 versus 656, Cinebench R20 shows 3029 versus 2736, and Cinebench R23 shows 7213 versus 6516. The AMD part maintains a 9.6% to 9.7% advantage across these tests.

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

A: The Intel Core i7-5950HQ has an average benchmark score of 2158, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 has an average benchmark score of 2086. The Intel part ranks at the 47th percentile of all CPUs, and the AMD part ranks at the 46th percentile.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads. However, they use different architectures: the Intel part uses Broadwell on a 14 nm process, while the AMD part uses Zen+ on a 12 nm process.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ does not list ECC memory support in its specifications.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and 29.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 runs at 3.35 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. The AMD part has a higher base clock by 0.45 GHz, but the Intel part has a higher boost clock by 0.10 GHz.

Thermal design power differs slightly: the Intel processor has a TDP of 47 watts, while the AMD processor has a TDP of 45 watts. Both use different sockets, with the Intel part on Intel BGA 1364 and the AMD part on AMD Socket FP5.

The market segments diverge as well. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ is classified as a mobile processor, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 is classified as a desktop processor. Production status also differs: the Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part remains active. The release dates are far apart, with Intel launching on June 1, 2015, and AMD launching on September 29, 2022.

Memory support differs substantially. The Intel part supports DDR3 memory, while the AMD part supports DDR4. Both use dual-channel buses, but the memory bandwidth is 29.9 GB/s for Intel versus 51.2 GB/s for AMD. ECC memory support exists only on the AMD processor.

The integrated graphics differ: Intel uses Iris Pro Graphics 6200, while AMD uses Radeon Vega 8. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $623, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors spans multiple generations. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-H, fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process. The AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 uses the Zen+ architecture with the Picasso codename, fabricated on GlobalFoundries' 12 nm process. The Intel part belongs to the Core i7 (Broadwell-H) generation, while the AMD part belongs to the Ryzen Embedded (Zen+ (Picasso)) generation.

Cache hierarchies differ in both size and organization. The Intel processor has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD processor has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part offers more L1 and L2 cache per core, while the Intel part offers more L3 cache overall.

The physical characteristics also differ. The AMD processor contains 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, while the Intel processor's transistor count is not recorded but its die size is 182 mm². The AMD part's larger die and higher transistor count reflect its newer process node and different design priorities.

PCIe support is identical: both processors offer Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU only. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part has a higher base clock, but the Intel part has a higher boost clock, which affects how each processor behaves under varying load conditions.

The foundry differs as well: Intel fabricates its own chip, while GlobalFoundries produces the AMD part. This difference in manufacturing is reflected in the process nodes, with Intel using 14 nm and GlobalFoundries using 12 nm, which typically allows for higher transistor density and potentially better power efficiency in the newer process.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear winner: the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 outperforms the Intel Core i7-5950HQ in every head-to-head test recorded. Across all six Cinebench comparisons, the AMD part maintains a consistent 9.6% to 9.8% advantage, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads. There are no recorded tests where the Intel part comes out ahead.

For users who prioritize raw processing performance in rendering, encoding, or general compute tasks, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 is the choice indicated by the data. Its higher base clock of 3.35 GHz versus 2.90 GHz contributes to its consistent lead, even though the Intel part's boost clock of 3.80 GHz exceeds the AMD part's 3.70 GHz. The AMD part also offers substantial advantages in memory bandwidth, with 51.2 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s, and supports ECC memory, which may be critical for reliability-sensitive embedded applications.

The Intel Core i7-5950HQ does have some points in its favor. Its average benchmark score of 2158 is higher than the AMD part's 2086, and it ranks at the 47th percentile versus the AMD part's 46th. It also offers a higher boost clock and more L3 cache at 6 MB versus 4 MB. However, these advantages do not translate into wins in any direct comparison.

The Intel part's status as an end-of-life mobile processor, released in 2015, contrasts with the AMD part's active desktop status, released in 2022. For new system designs, the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 offers a more modern platform with DDR4 support, higher memory bandwidth, and ECC capability. The Intel part's launch MSRP was $623, but no comparable pricing data exists for the AMD part.

The recommendation from the data is straightforward: the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2544 wins on performance across the board, offers superior memory support, and remains an active product. The Intel Core i7-5950HQ may still be relevant in existing systems or where its specific mobile form factor and integrated Iris Pro Graphics 6200 are required, but for any new deployment where these two processors are the candidates, the recorded benchmarks indicate the AMD part is the stronger performer.