AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B vs Intel Core i5-3550 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits cleanly between two eras of CPU design. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B takes three of the four head-to-head benchmark wins, while the Intel Core i5-3550 claims only one, but that single victory is decisive in a modern workload.

The AMD part dominates in Cinebench R15, both multi-core and single-core, and also wins Cinebench R23 single-core. These results point to a processor that handles lightly threaded tasks with clear authority. The 124.6% lead in R15 single-core is the largest margin recorded anywhere in the comparison, a gap that suggests the Ryzen's per-thread efficiency is in a different class from the older Intel design.

The Intel Core i5-3550 wins only in Cinebench R23 multi-core, but it wins big. Its score of 4073 against 3160 gives it a 22.4% advantage. This is the only test where the i5-3550 pulls ahead, and it happens in a workload that stresses all cores simultaneously. The older chip's higher base clock of 3.30 GHz and boost of 3.70 GHz appear to matter more here than architectural generation.

The split tells a story of workload dependency. For single-threaded responsiveness and legacy rendering tests, the V1605B is the clear choice. For sustained multi-core rendering in a modern benchmark, the i5-3550 holds a meaningful edge. The average benchmark scores are close, 1196 for the AMD part versus 1178 for the Intel part, a 1.5% gap that masks how differently they behave across individual tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing eras and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the Intel Core i5-3550 uses Ivy Bridge on Intel's 22 nm process. The node difference alone explains part of the efficiency gap, as the AMD part draws a 15 W TDP versus 77 W for the Intel chip.

Transistor counts reveal the scale of the design difference. The AMD processor packs 4,950 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, while the Intel chip contains 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. That is roughly 3.5 times more transistors for the AMD part, which enables its simultaneous multithreading. The V1605B supports 8 threads from 4 cores, while the i5-3550 manages only 4 threads from its 4 cores.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD part uses 128 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a shared 2 MB L3. The Intel part uses smaller 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per-core allocations but compensates with a larger 6 MB shared L3. For workloads that fit in the last-level cache, the Intel design may have an advantage, but the AMD part's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches could help with data locality.

Memory support separates the two as well. The V1605B uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus, while the i5-3550 uses DDR3, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The AMD part's integrated graphics is a Radeon Vega 8, a far more capable iGPU than the Intel HD 2500 found in the i5-3550. The Intel chip does offer PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD part's PCIe configuration is not recorded in the database.

Production status differs meaningfully. The V1605B remains active, while the i5-3550 is end-of-life. Release dates also reflect their generations: February 2018 for the AMD part, April 2012 for the Intel part. The Intel chip carries a launch MSRP of $194, while no launch price is recorded for the AMD processor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows the AMD V1605B scoring 654 against 410 for the i5-3550, a 59.5% advantage. This is a substantial margin that indicates the Ryzen's 8 threads provide a real benefit in this older rendering workload, despite the Intel chip's higher clock speeds.

Cinebench R15 single-core produces the most lopsided result in the comparison. The AMD part scores 128, while the Intel part scores just 57, yielding a 124.6% delta. This is an enormous gap, one that suggests the Ivy Bridge architecture struggles badly in this particular test. Even accounting for the AMD part's lower clocks on paper, 2000 MHz base and 3.60 GHz boost versus 3300 MHz base and 3.70 GHz boost, the Ryzen's per-core efficiency dominates.

The tables turn in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Here the i5-3550 scores 4073 against 3160 for the V1605B, a 22.4% margin in favor of Intel. This is curious because the AMD part won the older multi-core test by a wide margin. The newer benchmark likely scales differently with memory bandwidth, cache capacity, or instruction efficiency, and the Intel chip's 6 MB L3 cache and higher sustained clocks appear to give it an edge.

Cinebench R23 single-core returns to AMD territory. The V1605B scores 841 versus 575 for the i5-3550, a 46.3% lead. This confirms that the AMD architecture is significantly stronger per thread, even though the R23 multi-core test still favors the Intel part. The pattern across all four tests indicates that the i5-3550's multi-core advantage is specific to the R23 workload, not a general property of the chip.

The average benchmark scores place the AMD part at 1196 and the Intel part at 1178. The AMD chip sits at the 34th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel chip sits at the 33rd percentile. Their nearest rivals reflect this closeness: the V1605B trades within 0.3% of chips like the AMD Opteron 3365 and Intel Core i3-4170, while the i5-3550 sits within 0.7% of chips like the Intel Core i5-4440 and Core i5-2400.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload type and platform constraints. For users who prioritize single-threaded performance, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B is the stronger choice. Its 46.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 124.6% lead in R15 single-core leave no ambiguity. The AMD part also wins the legacy multi-core test by 59.5%.

The Intel Core i5-3550 is the better option for modern multi-core rendering. Its 22.4% victory in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the only head-to-head win it records, but it is a meaningful one. Users running current rendering workloads that scale across all cores may prefer the Intel chip despite its age.

Power consumption heavily favors AMD. The 15 W TDP of the V1605B against 77 W for the i5-3550 represents a dramatic efficiency difference. The AMD part achieves competitive or better performance in most tests while drawing a fraction of the power. This makes it suitable for compact or thermally constrained systems, whereas the Intel part requires a more substantial cooling solution.

The i5-3550 does offer a larger 6 MB L3 cache, which may help in cache-sensitive workloads, and it supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, a feature not recorded for the AMD part. However, the AMD chip has a far more capable integrated GPU, Radeon Vega 8 versus Intel HD 2500, and supports DDR4 memory.

Overall, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B wins the majority of benchmark comparisons and offers superior efficiency and newer technology. The Intel Core i5-3550 remains relevant only for the specific case of modern multi-core rendering, where its R23 score suggests an architectural advantage that the older benchmarks do not capture.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B scores 841, which is 46.3% higher than the Intel Core i5-3550's 575.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-3550 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 4073, beating the AMD part's 3160 by 22.4%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B has an average benchmark score of 1196, while the Intel Core i5-3550 averages 1178, a difference of about 1.5%.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Core i5-3550 has a TDP of 77 W.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B supports DDR4, while the Intel Core i5-3550 supports DDR3 with a recorded memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s.

Q: How many threads does each processor handle?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B handles 8 threads from 4 cores, while the Intel Core i5-3550 handles 4 threads from 4 cores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B | Intel Core i5-3550 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Zen | Ivy Bridge |

| Generation | Ryzen Embedded (Zen (Great Horned Owl)) | Core i5 (Ivy Bridge) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,950 million | 1,400 million |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 160 mm² |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2000.00 MHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 77 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP5 | Intel Socket 1155 |

| L1 Cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 2 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 25.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Not recorded | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 | Intel HD 2500 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2018-02-20 | 2012-04-28 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $194 |

| Part Number | Not recorded | SR0P0 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 34 | 33 |