AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 vs Intel Core i7-11375H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 across every Cinebench test in the head-to-head comparison. The Intel Core i7-11375H does not win a single benchmark in this direct matchup. The margins are consistent, with the AMD part leading by roughly 3% in most tests, which points to a steady, repeatable performance edge rather than a test-specific anomaly.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 scores 1017 against the Intel Core i7-11375H's 985, a delta of 3.1%. The single-core R15 result is similar: AMD leads 143 to 138, a 3.5% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD part scores 4241 in multi-core versus Intel's 4105, and 598 in single-core versus 579. Both represent a 3.2% lead. The R23 results follow the same pattern, with AMD at 10099 multi-core and 1425 single-core, against Intel's 9775 and 1380, again a 3.2% difference in both cases.

What stands out is the uniformity of the margin. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, and regardless of the Cinebench version, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 holds a consistent edge. This suggests the performance gap is structural, rooted in architectural efficiency, rather than something that appears only under specific load types.

The Intel part does have a higher boost clock, 5.00 GHz against the AMD's 3.80 GHz, but the benchmark results indicate that raw clock advantage does not translate into a win. The AMD part's higher per-clock efficiency, enabled by its newer Zen 3+ architecture, overcomes the clock deficit. The average benchmark score in the database tells a similar story: the Intel Core i7-11375H averages 3018, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 averages 2921. Note that the Intel average includes Geekbench results, which the AMD part lacks in the database, so the averages are not perfectly comparable, but the head-to-head Cinebench data is unambiguous.

The Intel Core i7-11375H sits at the 52nd percentile among all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 sits at the 51st. These are effectively peer positions in the overall distribution, which makes the consistent head-to-head losses for Intel all the more notable. The closest rivals in the database reinforce this: the Intel Xeon E-2334 and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U both match the Intel part's average score at 2988, with a delta of 1%, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600U is 1.1% ahead. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14's nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon E-2186M and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600, sit within 0.3% and 0.4% respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database, so the use-case split is largely defined by which workloads are represented. For Cinebench rendering tests, whether R15, R20, or R23, and whether single-core or multi-core, the AMD part is the faster option. The 3.2% multi-core lead in R23 (10099 vs 9775) is meaningful for sustained rendering workloads, and the single-core edge (1425 vs 1380) indicates that even lightly threaded tasks favor the AMD chip.

The Intel Core i7-11375H does have a place, but it is not defined by benchmark wins. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, and its Tiger Lake architecture supports features that the AMD part lacks in the database, such as integrated Iris XE graphics with 96 execution units. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 lists no integrated graphics at all. For a system that needs a GPU on the CPU package, the Intel part is the only option between these two.

The AMD part counters with hardware features that matter in embedded and server contexts. It supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. It also runs on DDR5 memory with a higher theoretical bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, compared to Intel's DDR4 at 51.2 GB/s. The AMD part's TDP is 15 watts, substantially lower than Intel's 28 watts, which makes it the better fit for thermally constrained embedded chassis. The Intel part is classified as a mobile segment chip, while the AMD part is classified as desktop, but both share the same PCIe Gen 4 configuration with 20 lanes from the CPU.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. The Intel Core i7-11375H uses Intel's 10 nm process, built at Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 146.1 mm². The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 uses TSMC's 6 nm process. The smaller process node gives AMD a density and efficiency advantage that shows up in the benchmark results despite the lower clock speeds.

The core architectures are from different generations. Intel uses Tiger Lake, specifically Tiger Lake-H, which is the 11th Gen Core family. AMD uses Zen 3+, under the Rembrandt codename. Both chips have 4 cores and 8 threads, so the thread count is identical. The cache layouts differ notably. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more cache at every level, yet still loses in the benchmarks, which underscores the efficiency of the Zen 3+ core design.

Memory support is another clear split. Intel supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus, with a peak bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. AMD supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with a peak bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. That is a 50% higher theoretical memory bandwidth for the AMD part, which can matter in memory-bound workloads. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD side, a critical feature for embedded reliability. Both use PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. Intel includes Iris XE with 96 execution units, while the AMD part lists no integrated graphics in the database. The AMD chip is a desktop-class embedded processor, so it is intended to pair with a discrete GPU. The Intel chip is a mobile part, so the integrated GPU is a meaningful feature for compact laptops.

The release dates differ by roughly 20 months. Intel launched on 2021-01-10, AMD on 2022-09-26. The AMD part is the newer design, which is consistent with its architectural advantages. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $482; the AMD part does not have a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 scores 10099, while the Intel Core i7-11375H scores 9775. AMD leads by 3.2%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-11375H win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 wins all six recorded head-to-head benchmarks, including every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 test, in both single-core and multi-core.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-11375H does not.

Q: What are the memory type and bandwidth differences?

A: The Intel part uses DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part uses DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both are dual-channel.

Q: Does the AMD chip have integrated graphics?

A: The database lists no integrated graphics for the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14. The Intel Core i7-11375H includes Iris XE with 96 execution units.

Q: How do their TDPs compare?

A: The Intel Core i7-11375H has a TDP of 28 watts. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 has a TDP of 15 watts.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 is the faster processor in every measured benchmark. The Intel Core i7-11375H cannot match it in any Cinebench test, and the margin is consistent at around 3%. If the decision is based purely on compute performance, the AMD part is the pick.

The Intel part still has its reasons to exist. It is the only one of the two with integrated graphics, specifically Iris XE with 96 execution units. It also has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz and more cache at every level. For a mobile system where a discrete GPU is not an option, the Intel chip is the practical choice.

The AMD part wins on efficiency and platform features. Its 15 watt TDP is nearly half of Intel's 28 watts, it supports ECC memory, and it runs on DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. For embedded systems where reliability, power draw, and memory bandwidth matter, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 is the stronger candidate.

The percentile rankings are close, 52nd for Intel and 51st for AMD, so neither chip is a class leader. But within this specific matchup, the AMD part is consistently ahead. The user should pick the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 for raw performance and embedded features, or the Intel Core i7-11375H only if integrated graphics or the higher boost clock is a hard requirement.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-11375H | AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 |

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

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1449 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Architecture | Tiger Lake | Zen 3+ |

| Codename | Tiger Lake-H | Rembrandt |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 146.1 mm² | Not recorded |

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

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris XE 96EU | None recorded |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2021-01-10 | 2022-09-26 |

| Launch MSRP | $482 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRKH4 | 100-000000557 |