AMD Ryzen 5 1600 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive victory for the Intel Core 7 360, which claims 11 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests. The most dramatic separation occurs in Cinebench R23, where the Intel part more than doubles the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 in both multi-core and single-core workloads. The Intel Core 7 360 scores 13,634 versus 6,468 in multi-core, a 110.8% advantage, and 1,924 versus 915 in single-core, a 110.3% lead. These are not marginal gains; the Intel processor effectively outruns the older AMD chip by a factor of two in one of the most widely cited rendering benchmarks.

The pattern repeats across several PassMark subtests. In floating point math, the Intel Core 7 360 scores 44,963 against 21,402, a 110.1% improvement. The physics test shows an 88.6% gap, with Intel at 1,213 and AMD at 643. Extended instructions favor Intel by 85.8%, scoring 12,390 versus 6,667. The single-thread PassMark result is equally lopsided: 4,274 for Intel versus 2,066 for AMD, a 106.9% delta. Even the older Cinebench R15 tests, which are less demanding, show Intel ahead by 31.3% in single-core (193 vs. 147) and 21.7% in multi-core (1,374 vs. 1,129).

The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 does not go down without a fight, however. It wins four tests, all in PassMark. The largest AMD victory comes in data compression, where it scores 172,053 versus Intel's 142,877, a 17% margin. Integer math also favors AMD, with 41,470 versus 34,238 (17.4% ahead). Random string sorting goes to AMD at 20,240 versus 17,636 (12.9% ahead). Data encryption is closer, with AMD at 11,683 versus Intel at 11,164, a 4.4% edge. The multithread PassMark test, which aggregates overall threaded performance, still lands in Intel's favor at 15,544 versus 12,270 (26.7% ahead), despite the AMD chip's extra threads.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split: the Intel Core 7 360 averages 18,374, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 averages 17,994. Both processors sit at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Intel part's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-13100 (18,380, 0% delta), Intel Core 5 330 (18,345, 0.2% delta), Intel Core i3-14100 (18,318, 0.3% delta), and Intel Core 3 305 (18,302, 0.4% delta). The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 5 320 (18,023, -0.2% delta), Intel Core 5 120U (17,898, 0.5% delta), AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17,891, 0.6% delta), and Intel Core 5 221TE (17,860, 0.8% delta). In other words, despite the head-to-head blowout in many tests, both CPUs occupy a similar overall performance class according to the database's aggregate scoring.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 7 360 wins 11 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 wins 4.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 scores 13,634 versus 6,468 for the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, giving Intel a 110.8% advantage in that test.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 win any meaningful workloads?

A: Yes. It beats the Intel part in PassMark data compression (172,053 vs. 142,877, a 17% edge), integer math (41,470 vs. 34,238, 17.4% ahead), random string sorting (20,240 vs. 17,636, 12.9% ahead), and data encryption (11,683 vs. 11,164, 4.4% ahead).

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 leads decisively. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4,274 versus 2,066 for AMD, a 106.9% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1,924 versus 915, a 110.3% lead.

Q: What are the overall average benchmark scores for each CPU?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has an average benchmark score of 18,374, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 averages 17,994. Both are at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 boosts to 4.80 GHz, compared to 3.60 GHz for the AMD Ryzen 5 1600. The Intel part also has a lower base clock at 1.50 GHz versus 3.20 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras. The Intel Core 7 360 is built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's own foundry, under the Wildcat Lake codename. It belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600, by contrast, uses a 14 nm node from GlobalFoundries, with a Zen architecture and the Zen (Summit Ridge) codename, part of the 1000 series and the Ryzen 5 (Zen (Summit Ridge)) generation.

The core counts are identical at 6, but the threading models diverge. The Intel part offers 6 threads total, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The AMD part offers 12 threads, doubling the thread count with SMT. Despite that, Intel dominates most threaded benchmarks in the recorded data.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Intel Core 7 360 provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a larger 16 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip also lists 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die, while the Intel part has no transistor count or die size recorded.

Memory architecture is another clear split. The Intel Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus, with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus, with 42.7 GB/s. The Intel part has no ECC support, while the AMD part supports ECC memory. PCIe capabilities also differ: Intel offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while AMD offers Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The Intel Core 7 360 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 has no integrated graphics at all. This matters for systems without a discrete GPU, since the Intel part can drive a display on its own.

The platform targets are different as well. The Intel Core 7 360 is a mobile segment chip on Intel BGA 1516, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is a desktop part on AMD Socket AM4. The Intel part has a locked multiplier, whereas the AMD part has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The Intel part's production status is Active, and so is the AMD part's, but their release dates are far apart: the Intel Core 7 360 launched on 2026-04-15, and the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 launched on 2017-04-10.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two CPUs differ, based on the recorded data.

• Threads: Intel Core 7 360 has 6 threads; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 has 12 threads.
• Base clock: Intel Core 7 360 runs at 1.50 GHz; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 runs at 3.20 GHz.
• Boost clock: Intel Core 7 360 boosts to 4.80 GHz; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 boosts to 3.60 GHz.
• TDP: Intel Core 7 360 is rated at 15 W; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is rated at 65 W.
• Socket: Intel Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 uses AMD Socket AM4.
• Architecture: Intel Core 7 360 is listed with no specific architecture name, while AMD Ryzen 5 1600 uses Zen.
• Codename: Intel Core 7 360 is Wildcat Lake; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is Zen.
• Generation: Intel Core 7 360 is from Core 5 (Wildcat Lake); AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is from Ryzen 5 (Zen (Summit Ridge)).
• Process node: Intel Core 7 360 is 3 nm; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is 14 nm.
• Foundry: Intel Core 7 360 is fabricated by Intel; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is fabricated by GlobalFoundries.
• Transistors: Intel Core 7 360 has no recorded value; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 has 4,800 million.
• Die size: Intel Core 7 360 has no recorded value; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is 213 mm².
• L1 cache: Intel Core 7 360 is 192 KB per core; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is 96 KB per core.
• L2 cache: Intel Core 7 360 is 2.5 MB per core; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is 512 KB per core.
• L3 cache: Intel Core 7 360 is 6 MB shared; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is 16 MB shared.
• Memory support: Intel Core 7 360 supports DDR5, LPDDR5X; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 supports DDR4.
• Memory bus: Intel Core 7 360 is single-channel; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is dual-channel.
• Memory bandwidth: Intel Core 7 360 is 59.7 GB/s; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is 42.7 GB/s.
• ECC memory: Intel Core 7 360 does not support ECC; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 does.
• PCIe: Intel Core 7 360 is Gen 4 with 6 lanes; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is Gen 3 with 16 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: Intel Core 7 360 has Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe); AMD Ryzen 5 1600 has none.
• Market segment: Intel Core 7 360 is Mobile; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is Desktop.
• Release date: Intel Core 7 360 launched 2026-04-15; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 launched 2017-04-10.
• Launch MSRP: Intel Core 7 360 is $426; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is $219.
• Multiplier unlocked: Intel Core 7 360 is locked; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is unlocked.
• Part number: Intel Core 7 360 is SAE3E; AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is YD1600BBM6IAEYD1600BBAEBOX.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the Intel Core 7 360 is the stronger performer in the vast majority of measured workloads, especially where single-thread speed and rendering matter. Its 110.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 110.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core are the most striking figures in the comparison. It also wins PassMark multithread, physics, floating point math, extended instructions, find prime numbers, and both single-thread tests. For anyone prioritizing raw speed in CPU-bound tasks, the Intel part is the obvious choice from the recorded benchmarks.

The AMD Ryzen 5 1600, however, retains specific strengths. It wins data compression, integer math, random string sorting, and data encryption. These are not trivial workloads; they reflect real-world productivity and security-related operations. The AMD chip also provides 12 threads, ECC memory support, a dual-channel memory bus, and an unlocked multiplier, which are meaningful for users who need those specific features. Its lower launch MSRP of $219 versus $426 is also recorded, though the Intel part's launch MSRP is higher.

The overall average scores are close, with the Intel Core 7 360 at 18,374 and the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 at 17,994, and both sit at the 72nd percentile. This suggests that in the broad database aggregate, the two are comparable in overall standing despite the dramatic differences in specific tests. The Intel part achieves its results on a 15 W TDP mobile platform, while the AMD part uses a 65 W desktop socket. The Intel part also includes integrated graphics, while the AMD part does not.

Which one to pick depends on the workload. For rendering, single-thread responsiveness, and modern mobile or compact systems, the Intel Core 7 360 delivers far higher scores in the recorded tests. For compression-heavy tasks, integer math, or builds requiring ECC memory and overclocking on a desktop AM4 platform, the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 offers its own set of advantages. The benchmark data does not crown a single universal winner; it shows two CPUs with different architectures, different eras, and different strengths. The Intel part wins more tests and wins them by larger margins, but the AMD part remains competitive in the specific workloads where its design excels.