AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G and the Intel Core 5 315 is clearly delineated by workload type. The AMD processor wins 3 of the 11 head-to-head tests, while the Intel part wins 8. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G dominates integer-heavy workloads, taking the passmark_integer_math test with a score of 45910 against 31690, a 44.9% advantage. It also leads in data compression (168041 vs 146143, a 15% edge) and random string sorting (18819 vs 17551, a 7.2% lead). These are classic CPU-bound productivity tasks where the Zen 3 architecture's per-core efficiency and cache structure shine.

The Intel Core 5 315, meanwhile, sweeps the floating-point, encryption, extended instruction, and physics tests. Its most dramatic win is in prime number finding, where it scores 112 against the AMD chip's 36, a 67.9% lead. Floating-point math also goes heavily Intel's way: 42441 vs 25245, a 40.5% advantage. The Intel part wins the multithread test (15272 vs 14033, an 8.1% lead) and the single-thread test (4021 vs 3096, a 23% lead). Physics simulation also favors Intel by 39.7% (1163 vs 701). The overall pattern is clear: AMD holds the integer and compression workloads, while Intel dominates floating-point, encryption, and single-thread responsiveness.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and market segments. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G is a desktop part in the 5000 series, built on TSMC's 7 nm process with 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. It uses the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne, and fits the AMD Socket AM4. The Intel Core 5 315 is a mobile processor, codenamed Wildcat Lake, manufactured on Intel's 3 nm node, and mounted on Intel BGA 1516. The process node difference is substantial: 7 nm versus 3 nm, which helps explain the Intel part's significantly lower thermal design power of 15 watts compared to the AMD chip's 65 watts.

Core and thread configurations differ meaningfully. The AMD chip has 4 cores and 8 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to reach 8 threads. The Intel part has 6 physical cores but only 6 threads, meaning it has no multithreading. Clock behavior also diverges: the AMD chip has a 4.00 GHz base clock and a 4.20 GHz boost clock, while the Intel part runs at a much lower 1.50 GHz base but boosts to 4.40 GHz. This aggressive boost behavior on the Intel chip, combined with its higher peak clock, underpins its single-thread wins.

Cache hierarchies are organized differently. The AMD chip provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. The Intel part lists 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support also diverges sharply: AMD uses DDR4 with dual-channel access and 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while Intel uses DDR5 and LPDDR5X with single-channel access but a higher 59.7 GB/s bandwidth figure. The Intel part also supports PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes, while the AMD chip uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. AMD includes ECC memory support; Intel does not. Integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD chip uses Radeon Vega 6, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the comparison belongs to Intel in the prime number test. The Core 5 315 scores 112 versus 36 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G, a 67.9% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to clock speed and branch prediction, and the Intel part's 4.40 GHz boost clock appears to be the decisive factor. The floating-point math test shows a similar story: Intel leads 42441 to 25245, a 40.5% margin. Physics simulation follows with a 39.7% Intel lead (1163 vs 701). These three tests establish Intel's dominance in mathematically intensive, single-threaded, and simulation-style workloads.

The AMD chip's biggest win is in integer math, where it scores 45910 against Intel's 31690, a 44.9% lead. This is a large enough margin to offset several smaller Intel victories in aggregate scoring discussions. Data compression also goes AMD's way by 15% (168041 vs 146143), and random string sorting by 7.2% (18819 vs 17551). These wins suggest that the AMD part is well suited to database, archival, and text-processing tasks that rely on integer throughput and cache efficiency.

The multithread test is closer than the core counts might suggest. Intel wins 15272 to 14033, an 8.1% margin, despite having 6 threads versus AMD's 8 threads. This indicates that the Intel cores are individually more efficient in this workload, or that the 3 nm process allows higher sustained clocks. The single-thread test is decisively Intel's: 4021 vs 3096, a 23% lead. Data encryption goes to Intel by 7.5% (11119 vs 10288), and extended instructions by 9.2% (13143 vs 11935). The overall average benchmark score favors AMD: 27382 for the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G versus 18188 for the Core 5 315. The AMD chip sits at the 79th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 72nd.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 scores 4021 in the passmark single-thread test, compared to 3096 for the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G, a 23% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD chip outperform Intel in any major workload?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G wins integer math by 44.9% (45910 vs 31690), data compression by 15% (168041 vs 146143), and random string sorting by 7.2% (18819 vs 17551).

Q: What explains Intel's large win in floating-point performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 scores 42441 in the floating-point math test against 25245 for AMD, a 40.5% margin. The Intel part's higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz and its 3 nm process likely contribute, though the recorded data only shows the final scores.

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no multithreading.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 315 does not.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G has an average benchmark score of 27382, while the Intel Core 5 315 has an average of 18188.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G | Intel Core 5 315 |

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

| Series | 5000 series | null |

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 6 |

| Base clock | 4.00 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.20 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Cezanne | Wildcat Lake |

| Process node | 7 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 10,700 million | null |

| Die size | 180 mm² | null |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 cache | 8 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Vega 6 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2024-09-04 | 2026-04-15 |

| Part number | 100-000001749 | SAEFC |

| Launch MSRP | null | $340 |

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G is the stronger choice for workloads dominated by integer math, data compression, and string sorting. Its 44.9% lead in integer math and 15% lead in data compression are substantial margins. It also has a higher average benchmark score of 27382 versus 18188, and a higher percentile ranking at 79 versus 72. For desktop users running productivity software, database operations, or archival tasks, the AMD part's benchmark profile is more favorable.

The Intel Core 5 315 is the better option for single-thread-sensitive applications and floating-point-heavy work. Its 23% single-thread lead and 40.5% floating-point math lead are decisive. The 67.9% advantage in prime number finding and the 39.7% lead in physics simulation indicate strong performance in simulation, scientific, and mathematically intensive tasks. Its 15 W TDP also suggests suitability for mobile environments where thermal and power constraints matter, though the data does not include battery or thermal measurements.

Users prioritizing raw multithread throughput in a compact mobile package may prefer the Intel part, which wins the multithread test 15272 to 14033 despite having only 6 threads. Users prioritizing desktop expandability, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and dual-channel DDR4 should select the AMD part. The Intel chip's launch MSRP is $340. The final choice depends on whether the workload leans toward integer productivity (AMD) or floating-point and single-thread performance (Intel).