AMD Ryzen 5 230 vs AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 Comparison

Both the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 and the AMD Ryzen 5 230 are 6-core, 12-thread mobile processors built on a 4 nm TSMC process, but they are far from twins. The data shows a clear split: the Ryzen AI 5 340 (Krackan Point, Zen 5) wins 9 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Ryzen 5 230 (Hawk Point, Zen 4) takes 6, with the margin of victory often more telling than the win count. The Ryzen 5 230 dominates in Cinebench, while the Ryzen AI 5 340 shows its strength in Passmark physics and data compression, making the choice highly workload-dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic difference appears in the Cinebench suite, where the Ryzen 5 230 delivers a decisive beating. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 230 scores 17857 against the Ryzen AI 5 340’s 12532, a 29.8% advantage. This is not a small edge; it is a generational gap in sustained multi-threaded performance. The single-core Cinebench R23 result follows the same trend, with the Ryzen 5 230 at 2521 versus 1915.5 for the Ryzen AI 5 340, a 24% lead. Even in the older Cinebench R15 single-core test, the Ryzen 5 230 wins with 253 over 242.6, though the 4.1% margin is far narrower. However, the Ryzen AI 5 340 claws back a win in Cinebench R15 multi-core, scoring 1915 against 1799, a 6.4% improvement.

Outside of Cinebench, the results are more fragmented. The Ryzen AI 5 340 wins the Passmark physics test by a massive 14.3% (1095 vs 958), suggesting better handling of simulation and physics workloads. It also takes Passmark find prime numbers (72 vs 66, a 9.1% lead), floating point math (39967 vs 38993, up 2.5%), and extended instructions (16440 vs 15618, up 5.3%). In Passmark multithread, the Ryzen AI 5 340 edges ahead with 19506 vs 19411, a slim 0.5% margin. Its wins in data compression (229796 vs 218588, up 5.1%) and single-thread (3683 vs 3558, up 3.5%) round out its victories.

The Ryzen 5 230 counters with strong showings in integer math, scoring 67257 against 63078, a 6.2% lead, and data encryption, where it hits 13280 versus 11470, a 13.6% advantage. It also wins random string sorting (26019 vs 24970, up 4%). These results paint a picture of the Ryzen 5 230 being a brute-force performer in certain compute-heavy tasks, while the Ryzen AI 5 340 excels in a broader range of mixed workloads, as reflected by its higher overall average benchmark score of 25981 versus 25782.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has a higher average benchmark score of 25981, compared to the Ryzen 5 230’s 25782. This places them both at the 78th percentile of all CPUs, but the AI 5 340 sits slightly ahead in aggregate performance.

Q: How do the two compare to a common rival like the Intel Core i7-11700K?

A: The Ryzen AI 5 340 scores 25981, which is 0.7% above the Intel Core i7-11700K’s 25812. The Ryzen 5 230 scores 25782, which is 0.1% below the same Intel chip. Both AMD parts are effectively neck-and-neck with that older desktop-class processor.

Q: Is the Ryzen 5 230 always faster in multi-threaded tests?

A: No. While the Ryzen 5 230 dominates Cinebench R23 multi-core with a 29.8% lead, the Ryzen AI 5 340 wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 6.4% and Passmark multithread by 0.5%. The results depend on the specific benchmark engine.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ryzen 5 230 scores 17857 versus the Ryzen AI 5 340’s 12532, a 29.8% difference. The second-largest is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ryzen 5 230 leads by 24%.

Q: Which CPU has better single-threaded Passmark performance?

A: The Ryzen AI 5 340 wins the Passmark single-thread test with a score of 3683, beating the Ryzen 5 230’s 3558 by 3.5%. This is despite the Ryzen 5 230 having a higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.80 GHz.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, both have a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and support dual-channel memory. The Ryzen AI 5 340 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Ryzen 5 230 only lists DDR5 support.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different microarchitectures, which explains most of the performance divergence. The Ryzen AI 5 340 uses Zen 5 architecture under the codename Krackan Point, while the Ryzen 5 230 uses Zen 4 under the codename Hawk Point. Both are fabricated on the 4 nm process at TSMC, but the die sizes differ: the Ryzen AI 5 340 has a die size of 195 mm², while the Ryzen 5 230 is smaller at 178 mm² and has a transistor count of 25,000 million.

Cache configurations are a major architectural differentiator. The Ryzen AI 5 340 features 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of L3 cache. The Ryzen 5 230 has 64 KB of L1 per core, also 1 MB of L2 per core, but doubles the shared L3 to 16 MB. This larger L3 cache on the Ryzen 5 230 likely contributes to its strong Cinebench results, as it provides more room for frequently accessed data.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Ryzen AI 5 340 pairs with a Radeon 840M, while the Ryzen 5 230 uses a Radeon 760M. The Ryzen AI 5 340 also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, whereas the Ryzen 5 230 only lists DDR5. Both are mobile parts on the AMD Socket FP8, active in production, and were released on the same date. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical at 6 cores and 12 threads, but clock speeds diverge. The Ryzen AI 5 340 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Ryzen 5 230 starts higher at 3.50 GHz base and boosts to 4.90 GHz. This higher base clock on the Ryzen 5 230 gives it a head start in short bursts, while the Ryzen AI 5 340 relies on its newer architecture to close the gap in specific tasks.

Both have a TDP of 28 W and use dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. They share the same PCIe generation (Gen 4), but the Ryzen 5 230 has more CPU-only lanes at 20, compared to 16 on the Ryzen AI 5 340. Memory support is another split: the Ryzen AI 5 340 accepts both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Ryzen 5 230 is limited to DDR5. The L1 cache size differs (80 KB per core on the AI 5 340 vs 64 KB on the 230), and the L3 cache is 8 MB on the AI 5 340 versus 16 MB shared on the 230. Neither supports ECC memory. The part numbers are 100-000001602 for the AI 5 340 and 100-000001726 for the 230.

The Verdict

The benchmark data makes a straightforward recommendation for different use cases. If the workload is heavily multi-threaded and follows the Cinebench model, the Ryzen 5 230 is the clear choice, offering a 29.8% lead in R23 multi-core. Its higher base clock and larger 16 MB L3 cache appear to pay off in sustained rendering or encoding tasks. For a more general-purpose mobile processor, the Ryzen AI 5 340 is the better pick, winning 9 of 15 benchmarks and achieving a higher average score of 25981. Its wins in Passmark physics (14.3% ahead), data compression (5.1%), and extended instructions (5.3%) suggest it handles a broader mix of real-world applications more gracefully.

The Ryzen 5 230 is not a slouch; it wins integer math by 6.2% and data encryption by 13.6%, making it suitable for cryptography and heavy arithmetic. But the Ryzen AI 5 340’s single-thread Passmark win (3683 vs 3558) and its overall average score tip the balance for mixed productivity. Both CPUs sit at the 78th percentile, but the Ryzen AI 5 340’s nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-11700K, is 0.7% slower, while the Ryzen 5 230 is 0.1% slower than that same chip. The data supports the Ryzen AI 5 340 as the more versatile part, with the Ryzen 5 230 reserved for specific compute-heavy scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 230 is the winner in environments that prize raw multi-core throughput and high-frequency integer operations. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 17857 is the standout, making it the pick for video rendering, 3D modeling, or any task that scales across all 12 threads. The 13.6% lead in data encryption also makes it attractive for security-related workloads, and its 6.2% edge in integer math suits financial or scientific calculations. The larger 16 MB L3 cache and 4.90 GHz boost clock are the likely drivers here.

The Ryzen AI 5 340, by contrast, is the all-rounder. It wins in Passmark physics by 14.3%, which is significant for gaming physics or simulation engines, and its 5.1% lead in data compression helps with file archiving and database workloads. The 3.5% single-thread Passmark win, despite a lower boost clock, shows the Zen 5 architecture’s efficiency. For users who do a bit of everything—occasional rendering, everyday productivity, light content creation—the Ryzen AI 5 340’s 9 benchmark wins, including Passmark multithread and floating point math, make it the safer recommendation. The Ryzen 5 230 is a specialist; the Ryzen AI 5 340 is the generalist.