AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B vs Intel Core i7-2675QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents a consistent picture across every Cinebench test: the Intel Core i7-2675QM wins all five head-to-head comparisons, yet the margins are surprisingly narrow given the architectural gap. The largest difference appears in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the Intel part scores 314 against the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B's 300, a delta of negative 4.5 percent for AMD. That translates to roughly a 4.7 percent advantage for Intel in that specific workload.

The pattern tightens in the newer Cinebench releases. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Intel chip delivers 1309 points versus 1253 for AMD, a 4.3 percent deficit for the Ryzen part. The single-core R20 result shows the same relative gap: Intel at 184, AMD at 176, again 4.3 percent behind. Cinebench R23 multicore repeats the story, with Intel scoring 3118 against AMD's 2985, and single-core R23 has Intel at 440 versus AMD's 421. Every delta in the head-to-head table sits at either negative 4.3 or negative 4.5 percent, meaning the Intel processor holds a small but consistent edge across all measured workloads.

What stands out is the uniformity of these results. The Intel Core i7-2675QM is a quad-core, eight-thread part, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B is a dual-core, four-thread chip. One would expect a larger multicore advantage for the Intel processor, yet the data shows only a 4.3 percent gap in R20 and R23 multicore tests. This suggests the AMD's newer Zen architecture compensates substantially for its lower core count. The single-core results reinforce that interpretation: AMD trails by just 4.3 percent in both R20 and R23 single-core tests, despite the Intel part's higher boost clock of 3.10 GHz versus 3.20 GHz for AMD (note the AMD actually boosts higher). The benchmark results indicate that raw core count matters less here than the efficiency of the underlying microarchitecture.

The overall average benchmark score tells a similar tale. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B averages 1027 points across its recorded benchmarks, while the Intel Core i7-2675QM averages 1012. The AMD part actually holds a slight edge in average score, despite losing every head-to-head Cinebench test. This happens because the Intel part has additional Geekbench results in its benchmark set, which are not present for AMD. The Geekbench multicore score of 1301 and single-core score of 415 for Intel pull its average down relative to its Cinebench performance. Both processors sit at the 28th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating they occupy the same performance tier overall.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core i7-2675QM wins all five recorded head-to-head tests. It leads in Cinebench R15 multicore (314 vs. 300), R20 multicore (1309 vs. 1253), R20 single-core (184 vs. 176), R23 multicore (3118 vs. 2985), and R23 single-core (440 vs. 421).

Q: How large is the performance gap in single-core workloads?

A: The gap is consistently 4.3 percent in favor of Intel. In Cinebench R20 single-core, Intel scores 184 versus AMD's 176. In R23 single-core, Intel scores 440 versus AMD's 421. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B trails by the same percentage in both tests.

Q: Does the AMD processor have any advantage in average benchmark score?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B has an average benchmark score of 1027, while the Intel Core i7-2675QM averages 1012. This is a small but notable difference, driven by the Intel part's additional Geekbench scores being lower relative to its Cinebench performance.

Q: What are the closest comparable CPUs to each of these processors?

A: For the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B, the nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-5650U at an identical average score of 1027, the Intel Core i3-4340 at 1026 (0.1 percent difference), and the Intel Processor N150 at 1025 (0.2 percent difference). For the Intel Core i7-2675QM, the closest rival is the Intel Xeon W5580 at 1012, followed by the Intel Core i5-2300 at 1014 (negative 0.2 percent) and the Intel Core i3-7100H at 1009 (0.3 percent).

Q: Do both processors occupy the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B and the Intel Core i7-2675QM sit at the 28th percentile among all CPUs in the benchmark database. This places them in the same overall performance tier despite their different architectures and core counts.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the AMD processor wins?

A: According to the recorded head-to-head data, no. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B has zero wins, while the Intel Core i7-2675QM has five wins. However, the AMD part's higher average benchmark score suggests it performs competitively outside the specific Cinebench tests measured head-to-head.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2675QM wins every Cinebench workload recorded in the database. This includes multicore tests across R15, R20, and R23, where its four cores and eight threads provide a structural advantage over the AMD's two cores and four threads. The margins are modest, between 4.3 and 4.5 percent, but they are consistent. For users running heavily threaded rendering tasks like those simulated in Cinebench, the Intel part delivers measurably higher scores. The single-core tests also favor Intel, though again by only 4.3 percent, meaning even lightly threaded applications see a slight edge for the Intel chip.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B does not win any head-to-head benchmark, but its average score of 1027 exceeds Intel's 1012. This implies that in the broader set of database measurements, the AMD part performs at parity or slightly better on average. The AMD chip also boosts to 3.20 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than Intel's 3.10 GHz boost, suggesting potential advantages in bursty, short-duration workloads that do not appear in the recorded Cinebench tests. Additionally, the AMD part consumes far less power, with a 15 watt TDP versus Intel's 45 watt TDP, which makes it more suitable for thermally constrained environments.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering, the Intel Core i7-2675QM is the clear choice. For users who need similar performance with dramatically lower power consumption, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B offers a compelling alternative, especially in embedded or mobile scenarios where cooling and battery life matter more than a 4.3 percent benchmark margin.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their core and thread configurations. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i7-2675QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. This is the most significant specification difference and directly influences multicore performance. The base clocks are close: AMD runs at 2.30 GHz, Intel at 2.20 GHz. The boost clocks also sit near each other, with AMD at 3.20 GHz and Intel at 3.10 GHz, giving AMD a slight peak frequency advantage.

The thermal design power differs sharply. The AMD part is rated at 15 watts, while the Intel part draws 45 watts. This threefold difference in TDP makes the AMD chip far more power-efficient on paper, though the benchmark data shows only a small performance penalty. The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses AMD Socket FP5, while Intel uses Intel BGA 1224. The memory support differs as well, with AMD supporting DDR4 while the Intel processor's memory support is not specified in the database. Both use dual-channel memory buses. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The integrated graphics differ: AMD includes Radeon Vega 3, while Intel includes Intel HD 3000. The market segments also differ, with AMD classified as Desktop and Intel classified as Mobile. Production status diverges significantly: AMD is listed as Active, while Intel is End-of-life. The release dates are nearly seven years apart, with AMD launching on 2018-02-20 and Intel on 2011-10-11. The Intel part has a recorded part number of SR02S, while AMD does not list one.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B uses the Zen architecture, specifically the Ryzen Embedded generation with codename Zen (Great Horned Owl). It is built on a 14 nanometer process node at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core i7-2675QM uses the Sandy Bridge architecture, part of the Core i7 generation, built on a 32 nanometer process node at Intel. The process node difference means AMD's transistors are significantly smaller, which contributes to its lower power consumption and competitive performance despite fewer cores.

The transistor counts differ enormously. AMD packs 4,950 million transistors into a die size of 210 mm². Intel uses only 1,160 million transistors on a slightly larger die of 216 mm². This disparity reflects both the newer process technology and the more complex integrated graphics (Radeon Vega 3 versus Intel HD 3000) in the AMD part. The cache hierarchies also differ. AMD provides 128 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 2 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel provides smaller per-core caches: 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but a much larger 6 MB shared L3 cache. The total cache allocation favors Intel in L3 capacity, while AMD offers larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

The foundry choices highlight the different design philosophies. AMD outsourced to GlobalFoundries, while Intel used its own fabrication. The architectural generation gap of roughly seven years shows in the data: despite having half the cores, the AMD part nearly matches the Intel part in every benchmark. This suggests that Zen's instruction-level efficiency and memory latency characteristics compensate for the core count disadvantage. The Intel Sandy Bridge design, while competent, cannot overcome its older process and architecture when facing a modern low-power Zen part.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The Intel Core i7-2675QM wins every head-to-head benchmark, making it the better choice for users who prioritize maximum Cinebench scores in both single-core and multicore workloads. Its four cores and eight threads provide a structural edge that the AMD part cannot fully overcome, even with a newer architecture. The margins, however, are slim: consistently 4.3 percent across most tests, with the largest gap at 4.5 percent in R15 multicore. For rendering tasks where every point matters, the Intel processor is the safer pick.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1202B, despite zero head-to-head wins, offers a higher average benchmark score (1027 versus 1012) and consumes only 15 watts of power, one-third of Intel's 45 watt TDP. This makes it the logical choice for embedded systems, compact desktops, or any application where power efficiency and thermal output are critical constraints. Its active production status and newer release date (2018 versus 2011) also mean it remains available for new designs, while the Intel part is end-of-life. Users who need a processor that performs at 95.7 percent of the Intel chip's level while using far less power should select the AMD. Users who simply want the fastest recorded benchmark scores in this comparison should select the Intel Core i7-2675QM. Both sit at the 28th percentile among all CPUs, so neither offers a dramatic performance advantage in absolute terms.