AMD Ryzen 3 7320C vs Intel Core i5-10400F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C and Intel Core i5-10400F occupy adjacent positions in the aggregate benchmark rankings, with the Ryzen posting an average score of 14277 against the Intel’s 14185. The overall delta is a mere 0.7% in favor of the AMD part, yet the head-to-head results tell a far more lopsided story. The Intel Core i5-10400F claims 16 of the 17 direct comparisons, while the Ryzen 3 7320C secures a single win, making this a case study in how aggregate scores can mask dramatic workload-specific disparities. The two chips sit at the 69th and 68th percentiles of all CPUs, respectively, confirming that they are closely matched in overall capability despite their architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-10400F dominates the multi-core Cinebench suite with a consistent margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel scores 1036 against the AMD’s 708, a 31.7% advantage. That exact delta repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore (4318 vs 2950) and Cinebench R23 multicore (10283 vs 7025), each showing the same 31.7% gap. The single-core Cinebench results follow a similar pattern: the Intel leads by 32.2% in R15 (146 vs 99) and by 31.7% in both R20 (609 vs 416) and R23 (1451 vs 991). These figures indicate that the Intel’s advantage is not merely a matter of core count; it also holds a clear lead in lightly-threaded performance.

The Passmark suite reveals where the Intel’s strengths are most pronounced. The largest margin comes in extended instructions, where the Intel scores 12500 versus the AMD’s 3663 — a staggering 70.7% deficit for the Ryzen. Floating point math also shows a wide gap: 25956 vs 14071, a 45.8% difference. Prime number finding favors the Intel by 48.6% (35 vs 18), and physics performance is 28.2% higher (696 vs 500). The Intel also leads in integer math by 22.2% (41471 vs 32247), random string sorting by 26.8% (23185 vs 16973), and data compression by 22.3% (185944 vs 144465). The multi-thread Passmark score is 31.8% higher for the Intel (12115 vs 8265), closely mirroring the Cinebench multi-core deltas.

The single-thread Passmark results are the closest comparison. The Intel leads by just 4% (2541 vs 2439), suggesting that the Ryzen’s Zen 2 core design is competitive on a per-thread basis in this specific test, even if it falls behind elsewhere. The AMD’s solitary win comes in data encryption, where it scores 5443 against the Intel’s 4100 — a 32.8% advantage. This is a notable counterpoint, indicating that the Ryzen’s architecture handles certain cryptographic workloads more efficiently despite its overall performance deficit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different platforms. The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C uses the Zen 2 architecture on a 6 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core i5-10400F relies on the Comet Lake architecture on Intel’s 14 nm process. The Ryzen’s die size is listed as 100 mm², whereas the Intel’s die size is not specified. Core configuration differs significantly: the AMD packs 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel offers 6 cores and 12 threads. This two-core, four-thread advantage underpins the Intel’s multi-core victories. The Ryzen’s base clock is 2.40 GHz with a boost of 4.10 GHz; the Intel runs at a 2.90 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost, giving it a higher frequency envelope across the board.

Memory support is another key differentiator. The Ryzen pairs with LPDDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 88.0 GB/s. The Intel uses DDR4 on a dual-channel bus, with a much lower listed bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. Despite the Ryzen’s superior memory bandwidth, it cannot overcome the Intel’s raw compute advantage in most tests. Cache layouts also diverge: both share 64 KB of L1 per core, but the Ryzen has 512 KB of L2 per core versus the Intel’s 256 KB per core. The L3 cache strongly favors the Intel, with 12 MB shared versus the AMD’s 4 MB shared. The Ryzen’s PCIe implementation is Gen 3 with 4 lanes, while the Intel offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes, giving the desktop chip greater expansion headroom. The Ryzen includes integrated Radeon 610M graphics; the Intel has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU.

The process node difference is stark: 6 nm for AMD versus 14 nm for Intel. This explains the Ryzen’s 15 W TDP versus the Intel’s 65 W TDP, a four-fold difference in thermal design power. The Ryzen targets the mobile segment on AMD Socket FT6, while the Intel is a desktop part on Socket 1200. Both are locked multipliers, but the Ryzen’s 7000-series positioning and Mendocino codename reflect a low-power design philosophy. The Intel’s release date is earlier (April 2020) compared to the Ryzen’s May 2023 launch, yet both remain in active production.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F scores 1451 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 31.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C’s 991.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C ever faster than the Intel Core i5-10400F?

A: Yes, the Ryzen wins in Passmark data encryption, scoring 5443 against the Intel’s 4100, a 32.8% advantage. It also comes within 4% in Passmark single-thread performance.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-10400F has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C supports LPDDR5 with 88.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core i5-10400F uses DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, both on dual-channel buses.

Q: Are both CPUs unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, both the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C and the Intel Core i5-10400F have locked multipliers.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, three times the 4 MB shared L3 cache found on the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 7320C | Intel Core i5-10400F |

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

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.10 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FT6 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Comet Lake |

| Codename | Mendocino | Comet Lake |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 100 mm² | Not specified |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 88.0 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 4 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 610M | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2023-05-22 | 2020-04-29 |

| Part Number | 100-000000774 | SRH3DSRH79 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-10400F is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its 31.7% lead across all Cinebench multi-core tests and its 31.8% advantage in Passmark multi-thread make it the superior processor for rendering, video encoding, and other tasks that scale with core count. The extended instructions benchmark shows the biggest gap — a 70.7% deficit for the AMD — indicating that the Intel handles SIMD-heavy code far more effectively. Floating point math, physics simulations, and prime number calculations all favor the Intel by margins between 28.2% and 48.6%. For users running such applications, the Intel’s 6-core, 12-thread configuration provides a substantial throughput advantage that the AMD cannot match.

The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C wins in exactly one benchmark category: data encryption, where it outperforms the Intel by 32.8%. This suggests a specialized strength in cryptographic workloads, possibly due to its newer architecture or memory subsystem. Additionally, the Ryzen’s single-thread Passmark score trails by only 4%, showing that its per-core efficiency is competitive in certain integer tasks. Beyond raw performance, the Ryzen’s 15 W TDP versus the Intel’s 65 W makes it the appropriate choice for power-constrained mobile systems, and its integrated Radeon 610M graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU. The Ryzen’s LPDDR5 support with 88.0 GB/s bandwidth also gives it a memory bandwidth advantage, although this does not translate into benchmark wins outside of encryption. For a compact, low-power platform with integrated graphics, the Ryzen 3 7320C is the sensible pick; for maximum compute performance, the Intel Core i5-10400F wins decisively.