Intel Processor N250 vs NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) Comparison

The Intel Processor N250 and the NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) occupy opposite ends of the mobile computing spectrum. The database records the N250 as a 4-core, 4-thread part built on Intel’s 10 nm process, while the DGX Spark is a 20-core, 20-thread processor fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node. This comparison examines the recorded specifications, cache hierarchies, memory interfaces, and market positioning of both processors. The data shows a clear split between low-power efficiency and high-throughput capability. The following analysis is based entirely on the recorded database entries.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates that the NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) is the superior processor for heavy, multi-threaded workloads. It offers 20 cores and 20 threads, a 2.80 GHz base clock, and a 4.00 GHz boost clock. The Intel Processor N250 provides 4 cores and 4 threads, with a 0.10 GHz base clock and a 3.80 GHz boost clock. The DGX Spark’s core count is 5 times higher, and its base clock is substantially faster. This combination points to a decisive advantage in parallel processing tasks.

The Intel Processor N250, however, holds a distinct position for power-sensitive applications. Its thermal design power (TDP) is recorded at 6 watts, compared to the DGX Spark’s 140 watts. This 134-watt difference is the largest single gap between the two parts. The N250 is suited for fanless designs, compact mobile devices, and scenarios where energy consumption is the primary constraint. Benchmark results for the N250 would likely show competitive single-thread performance given its 3.80 GHz boost, but the low base clock of 0.10 GHz suggests aggressive power management.

The DGX Spark is the choice for developers, researchers, and professionals who need maximum compute density. Its 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, enabled by a quad-channel LPDDR5X interface, is over 7 times the N250’s 38.4 GB/s single-channel bandwidth. The N250 is the choice for embedded systems, basic productivity, and battery-operated devices where the 6-watt TDP is a defining feature. The database shows no benchmark scores for either processor, so the verdict relies on architectural specifications. The data confirms that these are not competing products but rather divergent solutions for different segments.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The Intel Processor N250 uses the Twin Lake architecture, part of the Alder Lake-N generation. It is built on Intel’s 10 nm process and uses the Intel BGA 1264 socket. The NVIDIA DGX Spark, codenamed GB10, is manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process with a die size of 208 mm². The process node difference, 10 nm versus 3 nm, indicates a significant generational leap in transistor density for the DGX Spark.

Core and thread configurations differ completely. The N250 has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The DGX Spark has 20 cores and 20 threads, also without simultaneous multi-threading. The DGX Spark’s base clock of 2.80 GHz is far higher than the N250’s 0.10 GHz base. Both parts boost to similar levels, 3.80 GHz for the N250 and 4.00 GHz for the DGX Spark. The N250’s 0.10 GHz base clock is unusually low, suggesting it spends most of its time in low-power states.

Cache hierarchies reveal different design philosophies. The N250 provides 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The DGX Spark provides 128 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. With 20 cores, the DGX Spark’s L2 cache totals far more than the N250’s shared 2 MB. The N250’s total cache footprint is limited, while the DGX Spark allocates a large L2 per core to feed its many execution units.

Memory support is another major differentiator. The N250 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus, yielding 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The DGX Spark supports only LPDDR5X but over a quad-channel bus, delivering 273.1 GB/s. This 7.1x bandwidth advantage is critical for data-intensive workloads. The N250 uses PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes from the CPU, while the DGX Spark has no recorded PCIe lanes, relying instead on its integrated GB20B "Blackwell" graphics. The N250 integrates UHD Graphics 730. The DGX Spark’s graphics solution is a custom Blackwell-based GPU, which suggests a much higher graphics capability, though the database does not record specific GPU performance numbers.

The N250 is a mobile segment part released on 2025-01-06. The DGX Spark is also a mobile segment part but was released later on 2025-10-14. The DGX Spark has a recorded launch MSRP of $3999. The N250 has no recorded launch MSRP. The N250’s part number is SRPNS, while the DGX Spark’s is DSE1-275-A1. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The DGX Spark’s 140-watt TDP and 208 mm² die size indicate a high-performance part, while the N250’s 6-watt TDP indicates an ultra-low-power design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two processors. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, and the headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. In the absence of direct measurements, the analysis must rely on the architectural specifications and the recorded cache, memory, and clock data.

The largest measurable difference is in core count. The DGX Spark offers 20 cores versus the N250’s 4 cores. In a perfectly scaling parallel workload, the DGX Spark could process 5 times as many threads simultaneously. The thread counts match core counts for both parts, 20 threads for the DGX Spark and 4 threads for the N250. This 16-thread difference defines the multi-core advantage.

Base clock speeds show a 2.70 GHz gap in favor of the DGX Spark. The N250’s 0.10 GHz base clock is a power-saving baseline, while the DGX Spark’s 2.80 GHz base clock is a sustained operating frequency. Boost clocks are nearly identical, 3.80 GHz for the N250 and 4.00 GHz for the DGX Spark, a 0.20 GHz difference. Single-threaded performance at boost could be similar, but the N250’s ability to sustain that boost is limited by its 6-watt TDP.

Memory bandwidth is the clearest quantitative win for the DGX Spark. The recorded bandwidth is 273.1 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s for the N250. This is a 234.7 GB/s difference. For workloads that stream data, such as AI inference or large dataset processing, this bandwidth gap will dominate performance. The N250’s single-channel bus cannot match the DGX Spark’s quad-channel LPDDR5X interface.

Process technology favors the DGX Spark. The 3 nm TSMC node is more advanced than Intel’s 10 nm node. This allows the DGX Spark to pack 20 cores into a 208 mm² die while maintaining a 4.00 GHz boost clock. The N250’s process node is two generations behind, though its much lower TDP and smaller core count make it suitable for different environments.

Cache capacity is another measurable difference. The DGX Spark’s per-core L2 of 2 MB multiplied by 20 cores gives a total L2 of 40 MB, compared to the N250’s shared 2 MB. The DGX Spark also has 8 MB of shared L3, versus 6 MB for the N250. The DGX Spark’s larger cache hierarchy reduces memory latency for repeated access patterns. The N250’s 96 KB L1 per core is smaller than the DGX Spark’s 128 KB L1 per core.

Power consumption is the one metric where the N250 leads decisively. The 6-watt TDP is 134 watts lower than the DGX Spark’s 140-watt TDP. For battery life and thermal management, this difference is enormous. The N250 can be cooled passively, while the DGX Spark requires active cooling and a substantial power supply.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) has 20 cores, while the Intel Processor N250 has 4 cores. The DGX Spark also has 20 threads, compared to 4 threads for the N250.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The DGX Spark records 273.1 GB/s of memory bandwidth via a quad-channel LPDDR5X interface. The N250 records 38.4 GB/s via a single-channel interface supporting DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The N250 has a 6-watt TDP, while the DGX Spark has a 140-watt TDP. The N250 is designed for ultra-low-power operation.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The N250 boosts to 3.80 GHz. The DGX Spark boosts to 4.00 GHz. The base clocks are 0.10 GHz for the N250 and 2.80 GHz for the DGX Spark.

Q: Which processor uses a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The DGX Spark is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. The N250 uses Intel’s 10 nm process. The DGX Spark’s die size is recorded at 208 mm².

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Neither processor supports ECC memory. Both are recorded with eccMemory set to false.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Processor N250 wins in power efficiency. Its 6-watt TDP is the defining characteristic. For devices that run on batteries, generate minimal heat, or require passive cooling, the N250 is the appropriate choice. The 0.10 GHz base clock confirms a design focused on idle and low-load states. The N250’s support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives system designers flexibility in memory selection. Its integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides basic display output. The N250’s PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes allows for peripheral connectivity. This processor fits into the mobile and embedded segments where the 140-watt TDP of the DGX Spark would be impossible to accommodate.

The NVIDIA DGX Spark (MediaTek AHJ11488B) wins in every compute-heavy category. Its 20 cores and 20 threads provide 5 times the parallelism of the N250. The 2.80 GHz base clock ensures sustained performance without relying on boost states. The 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, delivered through a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus, is essential for large data sets. The 3 nm TSMC process allows high transistor density within a 208 mm² die. The 8 MB of shared L3 and 2 MB of L2 per core create a large cache pool for working sets. The integrated GB20B "Blackwell" graphics indicates a GPU-centric design, aligning with AI and graphics workloads. The DGX Spark’s 4.00 GHz boost clock is the highest recorded frequency between the two parts.

The release dates place the N250 earlier, on 2025-01-06, and the DGX Spark later, on 2025-10-14. Both are active production parts. The DGX Spark has a recorded launch MSRP of $3999, while the N250 has no recorded launch MSRP. The market segments are both listed as mobile, but the physical and power characteristics suggest different form factors. The N250 could appear in thin-and-light laptops or mini PCs. The DGX Spark, with its 140-watt TDP and 208 mm² die, is more likely a high-performance mobile workstation or compact AI appliance.

For single-threaded tasks, the 0.20 GHz boost clock advantage of the DGX Spark gives it a slight edge, but the N250’s 3.80 GHz boost is close. The N250’s very low base clock means it will spend much of its time at low frequencies, only ramping up when needed. The DGX Spark maintains a higher floor at 2.80 GHz. The database shows no benchmark scores, so absolute performance cannot be ranked. The architectural data, however, strongly favors the DGX Spark for multi-core throughput and memory-bound work.

The N250 is the pick for longevity on a charge, silent operation, and minimal thermal footprint. The DGX Spark is the pick for raw computational output, memory bandwidth, and graphics capability. The 134-watt TDP gap is the clearest separation of use cases. A system using the N250 could run on a small battery and a simple heatsink. A system using the DGX Spark requires substantial cooling and power delivery. The decision between these two rests entirely on whether the workload demands the DGX Spark’s massive multi-core and memory resources or can be satisfied by the N250’s efficient, low-power design.