AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 vs Intel Core i5-1335UE Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unusually close contest between the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 and the Intel Core i5-1335UE. Across all six Cinebench tests, the AMD part wins every single matchup, yet the margins are remarkably slim—ranging from 0.4% to 0.7%. The average benchmark scores tell the same story: AMD posts 2921 against Intel's 2907, a difference of roughly half a percent. Both processors sit at the 51st percentile of all CPUs, placing them squarely in the mid-range of the database.

Given these margins, the selection criteria must shift away from raw performance and toward platform characteristics. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 is the choice for systems requiring ECC memory support, as it explicitly supports ECC while the Intel part does not. The AMD chip also offers significantly more PCIe connectivity—20 Gen 4 lanes versus Intel's 8 Gen 4 lanes—which matters for embedded I/O expansion. Conversely, the Intel Core i5-1335UE brings integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, which the AMD part lacks entirely in the provided data, making Intel the pick for designs needing a GPU without a discrete card. For workloads that rely purely on Cinebench-style rendering, the AMD part holds a consistent, if tiny, edge in every measured test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD's Ryzen Embedded V3C14 uses the Zen 3+ architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, codenamed Rembrandt. It packs 4 cores and 8 threads with a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The cache hierarchy consists of 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with a rated bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The socket is AMD Socket FP7, and the part carries the part number 100-000000557. It is classified as a desktop-market segment chip, released on 2022-09-26.

Intel's Core i5-1335UE uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, codenamed Raptor Lake-U. It offers 10 cores and 12 threads—a hybrid configuration that the data does not break down by performance versus efficiency cores—with a base clock of 1300.00 MHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Cache amounts are larger per core: 80 KB L1, 1.25 MB L2, and 12 MB of shared L3. Memory support covers both DDR4 and DDR5, though the memory bandwidth figure is not provided. The socket is Intel BGA 1744, the market segment is Mobile, and the release date is 2023-01-03. Intel's process node is larger, but the clock speed ceiling is higher by 0.70 GHz.

The transistor counts and die sizes are absent from the data for both parts, so no comparison is possible there. The integrated graphics situation differs starkly: Intel includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while AMD's integrated graphics field is null. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD side. The PCIe lane counts also diverge, with AMD offering 20 lanes versus Intel's 8 lanes, both Gen 4. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a launch MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 wins every benchmark test in the head-to-head comparison. In multi-core workloads, the margins are 0.4% in Cinebench R15, 0.5% in R20, and 0.5% in R23. In single-core tests, the margins are 0.7% in R15, 0.5% in R20, and 0.4% in R23. These are consistent wins across all rendering scenarios, but the practical significance is minimal—no single test shows a 1% or greater advantage. The data shows AMD's 4-core, 8-thread configuration outperforms Intel's 10-core, 12-thread configuration in every Cinebench generation, which suggests the Zen 3+ cores deliver higher per-thread efficiency in these workloads, possibly aided by the smaller 6 nm process.

The Intel part's wins are not in the benchmark scores but in platform attributes. It offers integrated graphics, which is absent from the AMD data. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, providing flexibility for system designers. Its boost clock reaches 4.50 GHz, which is 0.70 GHz higher than AMD's boost, though this does not translate into any benchmark victory. The larger 12 MB L3 cache and bigger per-core L1 and L2 caches also do not yield performance advantages in the measured tests. The Intel part is classified as Mobile, while AMD is Desktop, which may influence thermal or form-factor considerations, though both have a 15 TDP.

The use-case split is therefore: AMD for ECC memory, more PCIe lanes, and marginally better Cinebench scores; Intel for integrated graphics, dual memory type support, and higher boost clock capability.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 has an average benchmark score of 2921, while the Intel Core i5-1335UE scores 2907. The difference is 14 points, or approximately 0.5%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-1335UE support ECC memory?

A: No. The data lists ECC memory as false for the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 explicitly supports ECC memory.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each processor provide?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 provides 20 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core i5-1335UE provides 8 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD part has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel part has 10 cores and 12 threads. Despite the Intel part having 6 more cores and 4 more threads, the AMD part wins all six benchmark comparisons.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-1335UE includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 has no integrated graphics listed in the data.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 boosts to 3.80 GHz. The Intel Core i5-1335UE boosts to 4.50 GHz, which is 0.70 GHz higher.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The six-way head-to-head sweep is one of the most tightly clustered results in the database. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 scores 1017 against Intel's 1013, a delta of 0.4%. The single-core R15 test shows AMD at 143 versus Intel at 142, a 0.7% margin—the largest relative advantage AMD achieves anywhere. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 4241 for AMD and 4221 for Intel, a 0.5% delta. The R20 single-core test repeats the pattern: 598 for AMD, 595 for Intel, again 0.5%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD posts 10099 against Intel's 10052, a 0.5% edge. The R23 single-core test closes the set at 1425 for AMD and 1419 for Intel, a 0.4% margin.

The consistency is notable. AMD's percentage lead never exceeds 0.7% and never dips below 0.4%. The average scores from the rival lists corroborate this: AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2186M at 2912 (0.3% below AMD), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 at 2909 (0.4% below), the Intel Core i7-9850H at 2934 (0.4% above), and the Intel Core i5-9600KF at 2935 (0.5% above). Intel's nearest rivals place the Core i5-1335UE in a similar band: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 at 2909 is 0.1% above, the Intel Xeon E-2414 at 2905 is 0.1% below, the Intel Xeon E-2186M at 2912 is 0.2% above, and the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 at 2921 is 0.5% above.

What these numbers indicate is that both CPUs occupy the same performance stratum as several older 6-core and 8-core parts from earlier generations. The Intel Core i7-9850H and Core i5-9600KF both slightly outscore the AMD chip, while the Xeon E-2186M and Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 trail it narrowly. The Intel part sits just below the same group, with the Xeon E-2414 as its closest comparable. In the direct matchup, AMD's 4-core design outperforms Intel's 10-core design in every rendering test, which is a surprising outcome given the core count disparity. The data does not provide clock-by-clock or per-core efficiency metrics, but the Cinebench results are unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 is the faster processor in these workloads, even if the practical difference is negligible for most applications.