CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B and Intel Core i3-4170 sit at nearly identical average benchmark scores, 1196 vs. 1193, yet they achieve that parity through radically different designs. The AMD chip wins every head-to-head benchmark in the data, with its largest victory being a 113.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core, while the Intel part counters with a much higher base clock and a launch MSRP of $117. These are two processors that look similar in aggregate but diverge sharply in workload-specific performance, making the choice highly dependent on the intended use case.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B has an average benchmark score of 1196, which is 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i3-4170's 1193, according to the nearestRivals data.

Q: How large is the AMD chip's lead in multi-core Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B scores 654 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, while the Intel Core i3-4170 scores 306, giving AMD a 113.7% advantage in that specific test.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-4170 win any single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The headToHead data shows the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B winning all three compared tests, with the Intel chip registering zero wins.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-4170 has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How do the single-core Cinebench R23 scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B scores 841 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 96% higher than the Intel Core i3-4170's 429.

Q: Which processor uses DDR4 memory, and which uses DDR3?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B supports DDR4 memory, while the Intel Core i3-4170 supports DDR3 memory; both use dual-channel memory buses.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B wins decisively in multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it posts 654 against Intel's 306, a 113.7% blowout that reflects the AMD part's 4-core/8-thread configuration versus Intel's 2-core/4-thread design. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows a narrower 4% lead for AMD (3160 vs. 3038), but the single-core R23 result tells the same story: AMD wins 841 to 429, a 96% margin. The data indicates AMD dominates every measured benchmark category.

The Intel Core i3-4170 has no benchmark wins in the provided head-to-head data, but its strengths lie outside raw Cinebench scores. It operates at a 3.70 GHz base clock with no boost clock, compared to AMD's 2.00 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, meaning the Intel chip runs at a consistently higher frequency when all cores are under load. Its 54W TDP is higher than AMD's 15W, suggesting the Intel part is designed for sustained high-clock operation even if it draws more power. The Intel chip also has an end-of-life production status, whereas AMD's part remains active, which may influence platform longevity decisions.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B uses the Zen architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, packing 4,950 million transistors into a 210 mm² die. The Intel Core i3-4170 uses the Haswell architecture on Intel's 22 nm process, with 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The AMD chip is nearly 4 times larger in transistor count, which explains its ability to deliver 8 threads from 4 cores.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The AMD part has 128 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 2 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. Despite having half the L3 cache, AMD's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may compensate in certain workloads. The Intel chip features PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD part's PCIe configuration is not listed in the data.

Integrated graphics also differ: AMD includes Radeon Vega 8, while Intel has HD 4400. The AMD chip's memory support is DDR4, while Intel uses DDR3, with the Intel part specifying a 25.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Specification Differences

The core specifications show a clear split in design philosophy. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B offers 4 cores and 8 threads with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Intel Core i3-4170 offers 2 cores and 4 threads with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and no boost clock. AMD's TDP is 15W, while Intel's is 54W, a 39W difference that highlights the AMD part's efficiency orientation.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP5, while Intel uses Socket 1150. The manufacturing process differs (14 nm vs. 22 nm), and the foundries are GlobalFoundries for AMD and Intel for the i3. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $117, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. Production status also differs: AMD is active, Intel is end-of-life. The Intel part carries the part number SR1PL, while AMD's part number is not provided.

Memory support is a major differentiator: AMD uses DDR4, Intel uses DDR3, both dual-channel. The Intel chip specifies a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while AMD's bandwidth is not listed. Cache configurations differ across all levels, with AMD having larger L1 and L2 per core but smaller shared L3 (2 MB vs. 3 MB).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test delivers the most dramatic result. AMD's V1605B scores 654, while Intel's i3-4170 scores 306, a 113.7% delta that represents the largest performance gap in the dataset. This test heavily favors the AMD chip's 8 threads, which allow it to process more parallel work than Intel's 4 threads.

Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows the gap considerably. AMD scores 3160, Intel scores 3038, and the delta is just 4%. This suggests that the newer R23 workload scales differently, potentially favoring Intel's higher base clock of 3.70 GHz over AMD's 2.00 GHz base. The AMD chip still wins, but the margin is far less dramatic than in R15.

The single-core Cinebench R23 result is striking: AMD scores 841, Intel scores 429, for a 96% delta in AMD's favor. This is counterintuitive given Intel's higher base clock, but the data is unambiguous, the Zen architecture's IPC advantage at similar clock speeds (3.60 GHz boost vs. 3.70 GHz base) produces a nearly double score. The Intel chip's lack of a boost clock means it cannot increase frequency under single-threaded load, while AMD's boost clock of 3.60 GHz approaches Intel's base clock.

Additional benchmarks in the Intel chip's data, but not in the head-to-head comparison, include Cinebench R20 multi-core (1275) and single-core (180), plus Geekbench multi-core (2033) and single-core (1090). These scores are not directly comparable to AMD results because the AMD chip lacks corresponding R20 and Geekbench entries in its benchmark list.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B as the stronger performer across all measured head-to-head benchmarks. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 113.7%, Cinebench R23 multi-core by 4%, and Cinebench R23 single-core by 96%. The average benchmark score of 1196 versus 1193 is nearly identical, but the distribution of performance favors AMD in every tested workload. The 4-core/8-thread configuration, larger cache hierarchy, and 14 nm process give it a structural advantage that the Intel chip cannot overcome despite its higher base clock.

The Intel Core i3-4170 is the choice only if specific constraints apply. Its 3.70 GHz base clock without boost means predictable, consistent frequency under all loads, which may suit certain real-time or latency-sensitive applications. The 54W TDP suggests it is built for sustained operation, and the DDR3 memory support may be relevant for legacy platforms. However, its end-of-life production status and 2-core/4-thread design limit its future-proofing, and the data shows no benchmark where it outperforms the AMD part.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering, single-threaded responsiveness, or energy efficiency (15W TDP vs. 54W), the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B is the clear pick. The Intel chip's only listed advantage is its launch MSRP of $117, which may matter for cost-sensitive builds, but the performance data does not justify choosing it on merit. The AMD part's active production status and 1000 series positioning suggest it is the more modern and viable option in the current market.