AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear overall win for the Intel Core 5 315, which takes 14 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G wins 3. The margin analysis, however, reveals a more nuanced picture than the raw win count suggests.

In the Cinebench suite, the Intel part is consistently ahead by a narrow margin. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core tests, the Intel Core 5 315 leads by 4.8% to 4.9%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel chip scores 12981 against AMD's 12359, a 4.8% advantage. Single-core R23 shows 1832 versus 1744, also a 4.8% gap. This consistency across all six Cinebench runs indicates a uniform performance edge in rendering workloads rather than a test-specific anomaly.

The PassMark suite tells a more varied story. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G wins PassMark data compression with 150567 against 146143, a 3% lead. In integer math, AMD is far stronger: 37292 versus 31690, a 17.7% advantage. The AMD chip also wins random string sorting with 19703 against 17551, a 12.3% lead.

The Intel Core 5 315 dominates the remaining PassMark tests, often by large margins. The widest gap appears in find prime numbers, where Intel scores 112 against AMD's 47, a 58% difference. Floating point math shows Intel at 42441 versus 23374, a 44.9% lead. Data encryption favors Intel by 22.6% (11119 versus 8607). Extended instructions go to Intel by 12.9% (13143 versus 11451). PassMark physics shows Intel at 1163 against 772, a 33.6% lead. The multithread test gives Intel 15272 versus 13368, a 12.5% edge. Single-thread PassMark also favors Intel: 4021 versus 3550, an 11.7% lead.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this distribution. The Intel Core 5 315 records an average benchmark score of 18188, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G sits at 17278. The percentile ranking places Intel at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs and AMD at the 71st. The nearest rival data for AMD includes the Intel Core i5-12450H with an average score of 17239 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 3 210 at 17321 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 5 4500 at 17333 (0.3% ahead), and the Intel Core i5-11400F at 17177 (0.6% behind). For Intel, the closest rivals are the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18189 (0% difference), the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 (0%), the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18177 (0.1% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 18176 (0.1% behind).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 wins 14 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G wins 3, specifically PassMark data compression, integer math, and random string sorting.

Q: How large is the Intel lead in the Cinebench rendering tests?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 leads by 4.8% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R23 multi-core, R20 single-core, and R23 single-core. The R15 single-core lead is 4.9%.

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G show its largest advantage?

A: The largest AMD win is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 37292 against Intel's 31690, a 17.7% lead. It also leads in random string sorting by 12.3% and data compression by 3%.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin in either direction?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core 5 315 scores 112 versus AMD's 47, a 58% difference. The second largest is floating point math, where Intel leads by 44.9%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 has an average benchmark score of 18188. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has an average score of 17278. Intel ranks at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, AMD at the 71st.

Q: Are the PassMark single-thread results consistent with the Cinebench single-core results?

A: Yes. The Intel Core 5 315 wins PassMark single-thread with 4021 versus 3550, an 11.7% lead, and PassMark singlethread shows the same scores. The Cinebench single-core tests also favor Intel, though by a smaller margin of 4.8% to 4.9%.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is strongest in integer-heavy and sorting workloads. Its 17.7% lead in PassMark integer math and 12.3% lead in random string sorting indicate an advantage in data manipulation tasks that depend on integer throughput. The 3% win in data compression adds another use case: compression utilities and archive handling. These three wins point to workloads where the AMD chip's architecture extracts more work per clock from integer operations.

The Intel Core 5 315 wins in every rendering benchmark recorded. The Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 results, both single-core and multi-core, all favor Intel by roughly 4.8%. This covers 3D rendering, video encoding, and any multi-threaded productivity workload that resembles Cinebench's workload. The PassMark multithread result, where Intel leads by 12.5%, reinforces the multi-threaded productivity picture.

The Intel chip also dominates math-heavy and cryptographic workloads. Floating point math shows a 44.9% lead, making it the stronger choice for scientific computing, physics simulation, and any workload relying heavily on FP32 or FP64 arithmetic. Data encryption shows a 22.6% lead, which covers disk encryption, secure connections, and hashing. Extended instructions favor Intel by 12.9%, relevant for SIMD-optimized applications. The find prime numbers result, a 58% lead, is the largest margin in the entire comparison and indicates a substantial advantage in prime-finding and related number-theoretic tasks.

PassMark physics goes to Intel by 33.6%, which suggests better performance in physics simulation and gaming-related physics calculations. The single-thread PassMark lead of 11.7% indicates that lightly threaded applications, including many games and legacy software, will generally run faster on the Intel part.

The use-case split is therefore clear. Choose the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G for integer math, sorting, and compression workloads. Choose the Intel Core 5 315 for rendering, floating point math, encryption, physics, and single-threaded responsiveness. The Intel chip's broader win distribution makes it the default choice for most mixed workloads, while the AMD chip's narrow but decisive integer wins make it competitive in specific data-processing scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every fundamental specification. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is a 4-core, 8-thread part with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel Core 5 315 is a 6-core, 6-thread part with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The AMD chip has more threads despite fewer cores, while the Intel chip has more physical cores but no hyperthreading.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The AMD part carries a 65 W TDP, while the Intel part is rated at 15 W. This reflects their different market segments: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is a desktop processor, while the Intel Core 5 315 is a mobile processor.

Socket and platform differ entirely. The AMD chip uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile package. Memory support also differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the AMD chip but not on the Intel chip.

PCIe lane counts differ. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel processor provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses a Radeon 740M, while Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe).

The launch MSRP for the Intel Core 5 315 is $340. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Release dates differ as well, with the AMD part released on 2024-04-15 and the Intel part on 2026-04-15. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part number is 100-000001187, and the Intel part number is SAEFC.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix2 codename, part of the 8000 series and the Ryzen 3 generation (Zen 4 (Phoenix)). It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at Intel. The Intel part has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database, and its architecture field is not specified beyond the codename and generation.

Cache layouts differ notably. The AMD chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip has 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. This means the AMD part has a larger L3 pool, while the Intel part has a larger total L2 despite the smaller L3. Neither part has 3D V-Cache.

The process node difference is one generation apart: 4 nm for AMD versus 3 nm for Intel, with different foundries (TSMC versus Intel). The AMD chip uses 20,900 million transistors, a figure the Intel chip does not have recorded. The AMD die measures 137 mm², while the Intel die size is unrecorded.

The Intel Core 5 315 has a higher core count at 6 versus 4, but the AMD part has more threads at 8 versus 6. The AMD chip has a higher base clock (3.40 GHz versus 1.50 GHz) and a higher boost clock (4.90 GHz versus 4.40 GHz). The Intel chip compensates with a smaller process node and a much lower TDP of 15 W versus 65 W.

Both parts belong to different market segments, which explains the architectural divergence. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G is a desktop part with AM5, dual-channel DDR5, ECC support, and 14 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The Intel Core 5 315 is a mobile part with BGA 1516, single-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X, no ECC support, and 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The memory bandwidth difference follows: 83.2 GB/s for AMD versus 59.7 GB/s for Intel. The Intel part's 3 nm process and 15 W TDP target power efficiency, while the AMD part's higher clocks and dual-channel memory target desktop performance within its 65 W envelope.