AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 vs Intel Core i5-12600HE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600HE averages 4980 points across all benchmark tests, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 averages 4967 points. That puts Intel ahead by 0.3%, which is the exact deltaPct shown in the head-to-head data.

Q: Are these two CPUs close in performance?

A: Yes, extremely close. In every single Cinebench test, the margin is between 0.0% and 0.3%. The Intel wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, but the largest winning margin is just 0.3% in multi-core tests. The single-core R15 test is a perfect tie at 244 points for both.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600HE has 12 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite having 4 fewer physical cores, the AMD matches Intel’s thread count.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The Intel Core i5-12600HE has a lower base clock of 2.50 GHz but a much higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: Do these CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-12600HE does not support ECC. This is a significant differentiator for embedded and server-style workloads where data integrity matters.

Q: Which CPU has the better process node?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 uses a 6 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core i5-12600HE uses a 10 nm process from Intel’s own foundry. The smaller node gives AMD an efficiency advantage on paper.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-12600HE is built on Alder Lake-H architecture, which uses a hybrid design. It packs 12 cores and 16 threads, with the cache layout consisting of 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The die size is listed at 217 mm². This is a mobile-market chip, and it integrates Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 is based on Zen 3+ under the Rembrandt codename. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The process node is 6 nm from TSMC, which is notably smaller than Intel’s 10 nm. This part targets the desktop embedded segment and carries a release date of 2022-09-26.

The most glaring architectural contrast is the core count: Intel fields 12 cores versus AMD’s 8. Yet both deliver 16 threads. This suggests Intel relies on its hybrid core arrangement to reach that thread count, while AMD uses simultaneous multithreading across fewer physical cores. The cache hierarchy differs too: Intel has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, while AMD’s L3 is slightly smaller at 16 MB versus 18 MB.

Memory support diverges as well. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode. AMD supports only DDR5 but adds ECC capability, a feature entirely absent from the Intel part. AMD also lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while Intel’s memory bandwidth figure is not provided in the data. Both CPUs run a 45 W TDP and use Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel uses BGA 1744, AMD uses Socket FP7. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is off the table for both. The Intel part number is SRLE5, while the AMD part number is 100-000000817.

The Verdict

The data paints a picture of near-parity. The Intel Core i5-12600HE wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the margins are razor-thin. In multi-core tests, Intel leads by 0.3% every time: R15 scores 1735 versus 1730, R20 scores 7231 versus 7212, and R23 scores 17217 versus 17172. Single-core leads are even smaller: 0.2% in R20 and R23, and a dead tie in R15 at 244 points.

If you need raw benchmark bragging rights, Intel takes it. The 12-core design gives it a structural advantage that shows up consistently, even if the percentage differences are negligible in real-world terms. The average benchmark score of 4980 versus 4967 confirms Intel’s edge, and the percentile ranking is identical at 59 for both.

However, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 has its own appeal. It matches Intel’s thread count with fewer cores, runs on a smaller 6 nm node, and adds ECC memory support. For embedded applications where data integrity is critical and power efficiency matters, AMD’s feature set could outweigh a 0.3% performance gap. The Intel chip offers no ECC and uses a larger 10 nm process.

Pick Intel if you want the highest benchmark scores and can live without ECC. Pick AMD if you need ECC, prefer a smaller process node, or value the embedded desktop positioning over Intel’s mobile-market orientation. The performance difference is so small that features and platform fit should drive the decision.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several key specification fields. Intel has 12 cores versus AMD’s 8, though both have 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz for Intel and 3.30 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 4.50 GHz for Intel and 3.80 GHz for AMD. The TDP is identical at 45 W for both.

Process node: Intel uses 10 nm from Intel foundry, AMD uses 6 nm from TSMC. Intel’s die size is 217 mm², while AMD’s die size is not listed. Cache configurations differ: Intel has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB L3 shared. AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB L3 shared.

Memory support: Intel accepts DDR4 and DDR5, AMD only DDR5. Both are dual-channel. AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, Intel does not provide a bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported only on AMD. PCIe is identical: Gen 4, 20 lanes from CPU for both.

Integrated graphics: Intel has Iris Xe 80EU, AMD has none listed. Market segment: Intel is mobile, AMD is desktop. Sockets: Intel BGA 1744 versus AMD Socket FP7. Release date only exists for AMD at 2022-09-26; Intel’s release date is not provided. Both are active production parts with locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 1735 against AMD’s 1730, a 0.3% win. The single-core R15 test is a perfect tie at 244 points for both, though the data still lists Intel as the winner with a 0% delta.

Moving to Cinebench R20, Intel again takes multi-core with 7231 versus 7212, another 0.3% margin. Single-core R20 shows Intel at 1020 versus AMD’s 1018, a 0.2% lead. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23: Intel wins multi-core 17217 to 17172 (0.3%) and single-core 2430 to 2424 (0.2%).

Intel wins all six benchmarks. The total wins tally is 6 for Intel and 0 for AMD. But look closer at the deltas: the largest gap anywhere is 0.3%. That is the entire performance difference between these two parts. In absolute terms, the R15 multi-core gap is 5 points out of 1730, the R23 multi-core gap is 45 points out of 17172. These are margins that would vanish in run-to-run variance on most systems.

The average benchmark scores tell the same story. Intel’s average is 4980, AMD’s is 4967. The nearest rival list for Intel includes AMD at 4967 with a -0.3% delta. For AMD, the nearest rival list includes Intel at 4980 with a -0.3% delta. Both CPUs sit at the 59th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12600HE wins every benchmark test in the head-to-head comparison. If you are looking purely at Cinebench performance, Intel is the choice. The 12-core configuration gives it a small but consistent edge in multi-threaded workloads, and the higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz helps in single-threaded tests. Intel also brings integrated Iris Xe graphics, which means the chip can drive a display without a discrete GPU. The dual memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 gives platform flexibility that AMD lacks.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C48 does not win any benchmark tests, but it wins on features. ECC memory support is the standout advantage, making it the only option here for error-correcting memory in embedded or server applications. The 6 nm process node from TSMC indicates better power efficiency potential, even though TDP is identical at 45 W. AMD also has a higher base clock of 3.30 GHz versus Intel’s 2.50 GHz, which could help in scenarios where sustained low-load performance matters more than peak boost.

The market segments tell the story: Intel targets mobile, AMD targets desktop embedded. If you need a drop-in embedded solution with ECC, AMD is the practical pick. If you need a mobile processor with integrated graphics and the highest possible benchmark scores, Intel is the pick. The performance delta is so small that it should not be the deciding factor — platform features and ECC support will matter more in real deployments.