AMD Ryzen 3 5305G vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear split between two processors aimed at entirely different segments. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G is a desktop part with 4 cores and 8 threads, built on the Zen 3 architecture, while the Intel Core 5 320 is a mobile processor with 6 cores and 6 threads, based on the Wildcat Lake architecture. The Intel part holds a significantly higher percentile rank, sitting at the 72nd percentile against all CPUs in the database, compared to the AMD chip's 50th percentile. The Intel Core 5 320 also carries an average benchmark score of 18023, while the AMD Ryzen 3 5305G has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, making direct numerical comparison impossible for most workloads.

The data indicates that the Intel Core 5 320 is the processor with measurable performance data. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, which scores 17994 and trails by only 0.2%, and the Intel Core i5-1334U, which scores 18154 and leads by 0.7%. This places the Intel part in a competitive mid-range mobile position. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G, lacking any benchmark entries, cannot be positioned against these rivals in the database. The choice between the two comes down to platform and workload availability: the AMD part offers a desktop socket with unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is a mobile BGA chip with a locked multiplier and a recorded launch MSRP of $340.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their underlying design. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G uses the Zen 3 architecture with the codename Cezanne, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It integrates 10,700 million transistors on a die size of 180 mm². The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process by Intel itself, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database. The process node difference is substantial: 7 nm for AMD versus 3 nm for Intel, which indicates a generational manufacturing advantage for the Intel part.

Cache configurations also differ markedly. The AMD chip provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel chip offers a total of 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD design allocates cache per core, while the Intel design reports aggregate L1 and L2 figures with a shared L3 pool. The core and thread counts tell a different story: AMD has 4 cores and 8 threads, leveraging simultaneous multithreading, while Intel has 6 physical cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading in this configuration.

Memory support separates the two as well. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G supports DDR4 with a dual-channel memory bus and a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus but a higher bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. Despite having half the memory channels, the Intel part achieves greater bandwidth due to the faster memory generation. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while Intel provides Gen 4 with only 6 lanes from the CPU, reflecting the mobile versus desktop positioning.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark results only for the Intel Core 5 320. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G has no entries in the benchmarks array, and the head-to-head benchmarks array is empty. Consequently, the Intel part's scores can be interpreted on their own, but no direct wins or losses against the AMD chip can be quantified from the recorded data.

The Intel Core 5 320 shows its strongest results in Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23, it scores 6197 in multicore and 1926 in singlecore. In Cinebench R20, it delivers 5462 in multicore and 771 in singlecore. In the older Cinebench R15, it records 1054 in multicore and 276 in singlecore. These scores indicate a processor that scales well in threaded workloads relative to its mobile power envelope.

PassMark results for the Intel part reveal its character across different task types. The multithread score is 15450, and the single-thread score is 4045. Data compression reaches 148779, while data encryption hits 10984. Floating point math scores 42440, integer math scores 32323, and extended instructions score 13262. Random string sorting records 18038, physics scores 1221, and find prime numbers scores 110. These figures show a processor with strong integer and floating point capabilities but a modest physics score, which may indicate limited sustained all-core performance in certain stress patterns.

The Intel part's nearest rivals provide context for its positioning. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 scores 17994, a delta of 0.2% below the Intel chip. The Intel Core 5 120U scores 17898, 0.7% lower. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT scores 17891, also 0.7% lower. The Intel Core i5-1334U scores 18154, 0.7% higher. This places the Core 5 320 in a cluster of similar-performing processors, with no rival differing by more than 0.7% in either direction.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows distinct differences across nearly every field. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are markedly different: AMD starts at 4.00 GHz, while Intel starts at 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks show Intel ahead at 4.60 GHz versus AMD's 4.20 GHz. TDP differs enormously: AMD draws 65 watts, while Intel draws 15 watts.

The socket and market segment reinforce the platform divide. AMD uses AMD Socket AM4 and targets the desktop segment. Intel uses Intel BGA 1516 and targets the mobile segment. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD part number is 100-000001802, while the Intel part number is SAE3H. The AMD release date is recorded as 2025-02-23, while the Intel release date is 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $340. The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded.

Neither processor supports ECC memory. The AMD part integrates Radeon Vega 6 graphics, while the Intel part integrates Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD part is in the 5000 series, while the Intel part has no series designation. The AMD generation is listed as Ryzen 3 (Zen 3 (Cezanne)), and the Intel generation as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 5305G has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD chip uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 8 threads, while the Intel chip has no extra threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G boosts to 4.20 GHz, and the Intel Core 5 320 boosts to 4.60 GHz. The Intel part has a higher boost clock by 0.40 GHz.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth despite fewer channels?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus and achieves 59.7 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus and achieves 51.2 GB/s. The Intel part delivers higher bandwidth with fewer channels.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Intel Core 5 320 has a TDP of 15 watts. The Intel part is designed for a much lower power envelope.

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 320 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 scores 18023 on average. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core 5 120U, 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, and 0.7% behind the Intel Core i5-1334U.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 3 5305G have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The database records no benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen 3 5305G. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its nearest rivals array is empty.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in every measurable benchmark category, simply because it is the only one of the two with recorded scores. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 6197 and singlecore score of 1926 indicate strong performance for a 15-watt mobile processor. The PassMark multithread score of 15450 and single-thread score of 4045 confirm its capability across both parallel and single-threaded workloads. The data compression score of 148779 and floating point math score of 42440 show particular strength in computational tasks that rely on sustained throughput.

The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G wins on platform flexibility. It uses the AMD Socket AM4, which is a desktop socket, and it has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for overclocking. Its 65-watt TDP suggests a higher power ceiling than the Intel part's 15-watt design. The AMD chip also supports dual-channel DDR4 memory, which provides a conventional desktop memory configuration. Its 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU outnumber the Intel part's 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, which may matter for discrete GPU connectivity in a desktop build.

The use case split follows the data. The Intel Core 5 320 suits mobile systems where power efficiency and a small footprint matter, given its 15-watt TDP and BGA socket. Its higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz and newer 3 nm process give it an architectural edge in single-threaded tasks. The AMD Ryzen 3 5305G suits a desktop system where the user wants an unlocked multiplier and an AM4 platform. Its 4.00 GHz base clock is far higher than the Intel part's 1.50 GHz base clock, which may benefit workloads that rely on sustained base frequency rather than burst boost behavior.

The benchmark cluster around the Intel part shows that it competes directly with older desktop processors like the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, despite being a mobile chip. The deltas of 0.2% and 0.7% against those parts indicate near parity in average score. The Intel Core 5 120U and Core i5-1334U round out a tight group where no member leads by more than 0.7%. This suggests that the Intel Core 5 320 delivers desktop-class throughput from a mobile power envelope, while the AMD Ryzen 3 5305G remains an unmeasured quantity in this database, leaving its performance position open to question.