CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 and Intel Core 7 160UL sit at nearly identical overall performance levels, with average benchmark scores of 14,336 and 14,232 respectively. That 0.7% gap places them adjacent in the nearest-rival list, with both CPUs hitting the 69th percentile among all tested processors. But the data reveals a sharp split in workload character: the Intel part dominates in raw compute throughput and single-threaded speed, while the AMD part counters with decisive wins in data compression, encryption, and extended instruction workloads. This is a matchup where the aggregate score tells you almost nothing about which processor is right for a given task.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 7 160UL’s strongest margin comes in single-threaded performance. It scores 3,391 in PassMark single-thread versus 1,609 for the V2546, a 52.6% advantage. That same pattern repeats across the Cinebench suite, where Intel wins every single-core and multi-core iteration by roughly 12.6% to 12.8%. In Cinebench R23, Intel posts 9,386 multi-core and 1,325 single-core, against 8,207 and 1,158 for AMD. The consistency is striking: across all six Cinebench runs, the delta sits almost exactly at -12.6%, suggesting a fixed architectural efficiency gap rather than workload-specific behavior.

The Intel chip also flexes in math-heavy PassMark tests. Its integer math score of 47,515 beats AMD’s 30,739 by 35.3%. Floating-point math goes Intel’s way too, 25,670 versus 18,534, a 27.8% gap. The biggest single-workload blowout is in PassMark physics, where Intel scores 819 against AMD’s 441, a 46.2% deficit for the Ryzen part. Prime number finding is similarly lopsided: Intel hits 50 while AMD manages just 22, a 56% difference that points to a substantial clock-speed and instruction-efficiency edge.

AMD’s wins are narrower but real. The standout is extended instructions, where the V2546 scores 8,799 against Intel’s 5,832, a 50.9% advantage that flips the script from the Intel-dominated math tests. Data compression favors AMD at 136,097 versus 108,953, a 24.9% edge. Random string sorting goes AMD’s way at 13,926 versus 11,843, a 17.6% margin. Finally, data encryption lands with AMD at 8,046 against 7,146, a 12.6% win. These four victories give AMD a 4-13 record in the head-to-head tests, but the wins cluster in precisely the areas that matter for embedded and server-adjacent workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, with a 156 mm² die containing 9,800 million transistors. Intel uses a 10 nm node from its own fabs. The AMD chip is built on Zen 2 architecture with the Renoir codename, while Intel runs Raptor Lake with the Raptor Lake-PS variant. These process and microarchitecture choices explain much of the benchmark divergence.

Core counts differ significantly. The V2546 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Both support 12 threads, but Intel spreads them across more physical cores. Cache configurations reflect that split: AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. Intel offers 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with a larger 12 MB shared L3. The Intel part’s larger per-core caches and bigger L3 pool help explain its single-thread dominance.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The V2546 runs a 3.00 GHz base and 3.95 GHz boost. The Core 7 160UL has a lower 1.80 GHz base but a much higher 5.20 GHz boost. That boost clock advantage, over 1.2 GHz higher than AMD’s, is the single most obvious explanation for Intel’s commanding single-thread lead. Power envelopes differ too, with AMD rated at 35 W TDP and Intel at 15 W. The Intel part delivers more performance while drawing less rated power, though the V2546’s higher TDP may reflect its embedded design targets.

Memory support also diverges. AMD supports DDR4 only, with dual-channel memory and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, though no bandwidth figure is listed in the data. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part but not on Intel. PCIe connectivity favors AMD in lane count, Gen 3 with 20 lanes, versus Intel’s Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD includes Radeon Graphics with 384 shader processors, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Intel part launched in April 2024, while the V2546 came out in November 2020.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL wins decisively. It scores 3,391 in PassMark single-thread versus 1,609 for the V2546, a 52.6% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core also favors Intel at 1,325 versus 1,158.

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 beat the Intel part?

A: The V2546 wins in four head-to-head tests: data compression (136,097 versus 108,953), data encryption (8,046 versus 7,146), extended instructions (8,799 versus 5,832), and random string sorting (13,926 versus 11,843). Its largest margin is 50.9% in extended instructions.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD V2546 supports DDR4 only, with dual-channel memory and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no bandwidth figure is listed in the data.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The AMD V2546 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Both support 12 threads, but Intel provides more physical cores.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the AMD V2546 boosts to 3.95 GHz. That 1.25 GHz difference is a key factor in Intel’s single-thread wins.

Q: Is ECC memory supported on either processor?

A: Yes, on the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546. The Intel Core 7 160UL does not support ECC memory.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 | Intel Core 7 160UL |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Base clock | 3.00 GHz | 1.80 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.95 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP6 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Renoir | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Process node | 7 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 9,800 million | Not listed |

| Die size | 156 mm² | Not listed |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 20 lanes | Gen 4, 8 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Graphics 384SP | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Release date | 2020-11-09 | 2024-04-07 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 160UL is the clear pick for general-purpose compute and single-thread-bound tasks. Its 52.6% lead in PassMark single-thread and consistent ~12.6% Cinebench margins make it the better choice for applications that rely on high clock speeds, such as interactive workloads, light compilation, or any software that doesn’t scale well across many cores. The physics benchmark result, 819 versus 441, a 46.2% gap, further suggests Intel is stronger in simulation and game-physics-style calculations. The larger L3 cache (12 MB versus 8 MB) and higher per-core L2 also favor workloads with repetitive data access patterns.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 takes the opposite side in data-centric tasks. Its 50.9% win in extended instructions indicates a meaningful advantage for cryptographic or SIMD-heavy code. The 24.9% compression win makes it the better fit for database storage, archival workloads, or network packet processing. The 12.6% encryption edge reinforces that position for secure communication pipelines. The random string sorting win, while modest at 17.6%, adds another data-transformation use case to AMD’s column. The V2546 also brings ECC memory support and more PCIe lanes (20 versus 8), which matter for embedded systems requiring reliability and expandability.

For embedded deployments specifically, the choice hinges on the workload mix. Intel offers higher peak performance with a lower 15 W TDP, which suits power-constrained chassis. AMD counters with a 35 W TDP but brings memory protection via ECC and a longer availability window (2020 versus 2024). The overall benchmark averages sit nearly identical, 14,336 for AMD versus 14,232 for Intel, so the deciding factor should be the specific application’s balance of single-thread speed versus data throughput and integrity features.