AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G vs Intel Core 5 223PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison scenario. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has a complete benchmark profile, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This means the head-to-head comparison is inherently one-sided, with the AMD processor holding all available measured performance data.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G shows a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,359 points and a single-core score of 1,744 points. Its Cinebench R20 results measure 5,190 in multi-core and 732 in single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test records 1,245 multi-core and 175 single-core. These scores place the processor in the 71st percentile across all CPUs in the database.

Looking at PassMark results, the AMD chip delivers a multi-thread score of 13,368 and a single-thread score of 3,550. Integer math reaches 37,292, floating point math measures 23,374, and extended instructions score 11,451. Data compression workloads produce a score of 150,567, while data encryption reaches 8,607. Prime number finding scores 47, physics calculations reach 772, and random string sorting records 19,703.

The average benchmark score for the AMD processor is 17,278. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i5-12450H at 17,239, just 0.2% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 3 210 at 17,321, which is 0.2% ahead. The AMD Ryzen 5 4500 scores 17,333, 0.3% ahead, and the Intel Core i5-11400F measures 17,177, 0.6% behind. These tight deltas indicate the Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G sits in a competitive performance band, though no direct comparison with the Intel Core 5 223PQE is possible from the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

Without any benchmark entries for the Intel Core 5 223PQE, the database cannot attribute any measured wins to that processor. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G holds every available performance record in this comparison.

The AMD processor's strengths appear across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,744 and multi-core score of 12,359 indicate balanced capability across different thread counts. PassMark results reinforce this, with integer math at 37,292 and floating point at 23,374 showing solid arithmetic throughput.

For the Intel Core 5 223PQE, the absence of benchmark data means its performance characteristics remain unquantified in this database. The processor does have a 50th percentile ranking across all CPUs, which suggests mid-pack positioning, but no raw scores exist to support that ranking. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero, which aligns with the empty benchmark array.

The data supports a clear split: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is the only processor with demonstrated performance, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE is a known entity in terms of specifications but an unknown quantity in terms of measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different silicon designs. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is built on Zen 4 architecture using the Phoenix2 codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 223PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel. The process node difference is substantial: 4 nm versus 10 nm, which typically implies significant differences in transistor density and power efficiency, though the database does not record power metrics for the Intel part beyond its thermal design power.

The AMD processor contains 20,900 million transistors on a die size of 137 mm². No transistor count or die size data exists for the Intel chip. Cache configurations differ notably. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel L3 cache is three times larger in total capacity, which can benefit workloads with large working sets.

Core and thread counts also diverge. The AMD part has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel part doubles that with 8 cores and 16 threads. This is a significant structural difference that typically favors the Intel chip in heavily parallel workloads, assuming comparable per-core performance. The AMD processor's smaller core count may limit its multi-threaded ceiling, though the database lacks Intel scores to confirm this.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds show the Intel Core 5 223PQE with higher rated frequencies. Its base clock is 4.00 GHz versus 3.40 GHz for AMD, and its boost clock reaches 5.50 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. Thermal design power differs substantially: the AMD chip is rated at 65 watts, while the Intel chip consumes 125 watts. This implies higher power draw for the Intel part, which may require more robust cooling solutions.

Memory support varies. The AMD processor supports DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with a higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for reliability-focused workloads.

PCIe connectivity differs by generation and lane count. AMD uses Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, while Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Gen 5 interface offers higher potential bandwidth per lane, though the lane count advantage is modest. Integrated graphics also differ: AMD includes Radeon 740M, while Intel includes UHD Graphics 770.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket AM5, while Intel uses Socket 1700. The AMD processor launched on April 15, 2024, while the Intel processor launched on March 8, 2026. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $319, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning they are not designed for overclocking.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PQE has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, compared to 4.90 GHz for the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G supports DDR5 only, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PQE has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has 8 MB.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores recorded for the Intel Core 5 223PQE?

A: No, the database contains no benchmark entries for the Intel Core 5 223PQE; its average benchmark score is recorded as zero.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

The Verdict

The database presents a lopsided comparison. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has complete benchmark coverage, with scores across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and multiple PassMark tests. Its 71st percentile ranking and average score of 17,278 place it near established rivals like the Intel Core i5-12450H, which scores 17,239 with a 0.2% delta, and the AMD Ryzen 5 4500, which scores 17,333 with a 0.3% delta.

The Intel Core 5 223PQE, by contrast, has no measured performance data. Its 50th percentile ranking is recorded, but no raw scores support that position. The processor's specifications suggest it should be competitive: 8 cores and 16 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads for AMD, with higher clock speeds and triple the L3 cache. The 125 watt TDP and 5.50 GHz boost clock indicate a performance-oriented design.

For users requiring measured performance data, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is the only processor with verified results. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration with a 4.90 GHz boost clock delivers solid single-thread and moderate multi-thread performance, as shown by the Cinebench and PassMark scores. The Intel Core 5 223PQE remains an unquantified option in this database, with specifications that suggest higher multi-threaded capability but no recorded benchmarks to confirm it.

The choice between these two processors depends on whether specifications or measured results take priority. The AMD part offers confirmed performance within a competitive range of several rivals. The Intel part offers a stronger theoretical specification sheet, including more cores, higher clocks, and larger cache, but the database cannot substantiate those advantages with actual scores.