AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 vs Intel Core i5-6600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 wins all six shared Cinebench tests against the Intel Core i5-6600. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 619 versus Intel’s 520, a 19% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a nearly identical gap, 87 versus 73, a 19.2% lead for the Ryzen. Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds: the Ryzen scores 2582 in multi-core against Intel’s 2167 (19.2% delta), and 364 in single-core against Intel’s 305 (19.3% delta). The newest R23 suite repeats the result, with the Ryzen at 6148 multi-core and 868 single-core, versus Intel’s 5161 and 728, respectively, both at roughly 19.1% to 19.2% deltas. Across all six head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD chip claims a 19% or greater margin in every discipline.

The Intel Core i5-6600 does have additional Geekbench scores recorded in the database, but these are not part of the direct head-to-head matrix. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300’s average benchmark score is 1778, while the Intel part sits at 1744. This difference is modest in absolute terms, but the Cinebench suite shows a consistent and substantial edge for the AMD processor, one that is larger than the average score difference would suggest. The percentile ranking for both CPUs is identical at 41% versus all CPUs, indicating that despite the Cinebench deltas, both processors occupy a similar overall performance tier. The Ryzen’s wins are real but narrow in the broader context of the entire CPU market.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectural philosophies, though both use a 14 nm process node. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is based on the Zen architecture, codenamed Summit Ridge, and is manufactured by GlobalFoundries. It features 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel Core i5-6600 uses the Skylake architecture, made by Intel itself, also with 4 cores and 4 threads, but with a lower base clock of 3.30 GHz and a higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The Intel part compensates for its lower base frequency with a more aggressive boost, yet it still trails in all recorded Cinebench results.

Cache configurations differ notably. The AMD chip has 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, plus a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a smaller 6 MB shared L3 cache. The larger cache hierarchy on the AMD side likely contributes to its performance advantage in the benchmark suite. The transistor count for the AMD processor is 4,800 million, while the Intel chip’s transistor count is not recorded in the database. The die size also differs, with AMD at 213 mm² and Intel at 177 mm², reflecting the different design approaches.

Memory support is another divergence. The Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 supports DDR4 memory only, with dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-6600 supports both DDR3 and DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a lower memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. The Intel chip includes integrated UHD Graphics 530, whereas the AMD processor has no integrated graphics recorded. The Intel part also has a PCIe Gen 3 interface with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD chip’s PCIe configuration is not listed. The Ryzen has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. The Intel CPU is marked as end-of-life in production status, while the AMD chip is active. The Intel part’s launch MSRP is $224, which can be stated once as a reference point.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 wins every single head-to-head comparison. This is a clean sweep across all six Cinebench tests, covering both multi-core and single-core workloads from R15 through R23. The smallest margin is 19% in R15 multi-core, and the largest is 19.3% in R20 single-core. For users prioritizing CPU-bound rendering, compilation, or any workload that stresses the processor in a similar manner to Cinebench, the AMD part is the clear choice. Its higher memory bandwidth (42.7 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) and larger caches may also benefit data-intensive tasks, though the benchmark data does not directly quantify this.

The Intel Core i5-6600 does not win any of the six shared tests, but it does have advantages outside the Cinebench suite. It features integrated UHD Graphics 530, which the AMD part lacks entirely, making it a better option for systems without a discrete GPU. The Intel chip also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, offering more flexibility in platform choice. Its lower TDP of 35 watts, versus 65 watts for the AMD part, indicates a more power-efficient design for cooling and energy costs, though the database does not record power consumption measurements. The Intel part’s higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus 3.70 GHz on the AMD chip might benefit short, lightly threaded bursts, but the single-core benchmark results show the AMD part winning by 19.2% to 19.3% in those tests, so this clock advantage does not translate into a measured win.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 also supports ECC memory, a feature that the Intel part does not offer. This makes the AMD chip more suitable for entry-level servers or workstations where data integrity is critical. The AMD part’s active production status, versus Intel’s end-of-life status, is another practical consideration for new system builds. The unlocked multiplier on the AMD chip allows for overclocking, while the Intel part is locked, though the database records no overclocking results to quantify any benefit.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is decisive: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 outperforms the Intel Core i5-6600 in every measured Cinebench test. The margins are consistent, ranging from 19.0% to 19.3%, which is a substantial and repeatable advantage. For any user whose workload is represented by the Cinebench suite, the AMD part is the superior choice. Its larger caches, higher memory bandwidth, and ECC support add further qualitative benefits that the Intel part cannot match. The Intel chip does have integrated graphics and a lower TDP, which are meaningful for specific use cases, but these do not offset the performance deficit in the recorded benchmarks.

The average benchmark scores are close (1778 for AMD, 1744 for Intel), and both CPUs sit at the 41st percentile overall. This suggests that in a broader benchmark database, the two parts are near-equal in general performance, but the Cinebench-specific results show a clear AMD advantage. The Intel part’s only recorded wins come from the Geekbench tests, which are not part of the direct head-to-head comparison. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 is the pick for users who need the best measured multi-threaded and single-threaded performance in this pairing. The Intel Core i5-6600 remains a viable option for systems requiring integrated graphics or lower power draw, but the data indicates a performance trade-off.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 scores 6148, which is 19.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-6600’s 5161.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-6600 support ECC memory?

A: No. The database records ECC memory support for the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300, but not for the Intel Core i5-6600.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Intel Core i5-6600 has a TDP of 35 watts.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-6600 includes UHD Graphics 530. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 has no integrated graphics recorded in the database.

Q: What are the single-core scores in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 scores 87, while the Intel Core i5-6600 scores 73, giving the AMD part a 19.2% lead.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 still in production?

A: Yes, the database lists the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1300 as active, while the Intel Core i5-6600 is marked as end-of-life.