AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 and Intel Core 5 315 are both six-core mobile processors, yet the recorded data shows they are built for fundamentally different workloads. The Ryzen 5 240 wins 10 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core 5 315 takes 5. However, the margin of victory tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count. The AMD part dominates heavily in multi-threaded and data-heavy tasks, while the Intel part shows surprising strength in single-threaded and specific integer workloads. The average benchmark score for the AMD Ryzen 5 240 is 33,542, placing it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 5 315 averages 18,188, which lands in the 72nd percentile. This divergence in overall scoring and workload-specific results suggests two distinct design philosophies rather than a simple winner.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is the clear leader in throughput-oriented tasks. Its largest wins come from PassMark’s integer math test, where it scores 73,189 against the Intel’s 31,690, a delta of 131%. Data compression also heavily favors AMD, with a score of 267,963 versus 146,143, an 83.4% advantage. Random string sorting follows the same pattern: AMD scores 32,385, Intel scores 17,551, a 84.5% gap. Multithreaded performance in PassMark shows AMD at 22,658 versus Intel’s 15,272, a 48.4% lead. Cinebench R15 multicore confirms this trend, with AMD scoring 2,078 and Intel scoring 1,308, a 58.9% advantage. The AMD processor also wins in data encryption (15,849 vs 11,119, up 42.5%) and extended instructions (20,201 vs 13,143, up 53.7%).

The Intel Core 5 315 wins the single-threaded races. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4,021 against AMD’s 3,675, an 8.6% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core also goes to Intel, with 1,832 versus 1,742, a 4.9% margin. The Intel part also wins PassMark’s physics test (1,163 vs 1,060, up 8.9%) and the prime numbers test (112 vs 70, up 37.5%). Notably, the Cinebench R23 multicore result is almost a tie: AMD scores 13,013, Intel scores 12,981, a difference of just 0.2%. This means that in modern, well-optimized rendering workloads, the two processors are effectively equivalent, despite AMD’s massive lead in older Cinebench R15 multicore.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use entirely different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, and manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, meaning it supports simultaneous multithreading. Its base clock is 4.30 GHz with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and it carries a 45 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. It uses a dual-channel DDR5 memory bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The integrated graphics are the Radeon 760M.

The Intel Core 5 315 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename, manufactured on a 3 nm process at Intel. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, so it lacks hyper-threading entirely. Its base clock is much lower at 1.50 GHz, with a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, and its TDP is just 15 W. The cache configuration shows 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the memory bus is single-channel, capping bandwidth at 59.7 GB/s. The integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The PCIe support also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 4 with only 6 lanes.

The transistor count and die size are only recorded for the AMD part: 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. These figures are absent for the Intel processor. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has a higher TDP by 30 W, which explains its higher base clock and greater multi-threaded performance, but it also means the Intel part is designed for lower power envelopes. The single-channel memory bus on the Intel side is a significant constraint, likely affecting its performance in memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks like data compression.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single delta in the entire comparison is PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen 5 240 leads by 131%. This is a staggering margin, indicating that the AMD processor’s 12 threads provide a massive advantage in parallel integer operations. The random string sorting delta of 84.5% and data compression delta of 83.4% are similarly wide, both pointing to the AMD part’s superior multi-threading and memory bandwidth. The Cinebench R15 multicore delta of 58.9% is also substantial, though this benchmark is older and may not reflect modern scaling.

The Intel Core 5 315’s wins are narrower. Its best result is the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it leads by 37.5%, scoring 112 versus 70. This is an interesting anomaly, as the Intel part’s higher single-thread score and possibly different instruction scheduling give it an edge in this specific workload. Its PassMark single-thread lead is 8.6%, and its physics lead is 8.9%. The Cinebench R23 single-core lead is just 4.9%. These margins are far smaller than AMD’s wins, suggesting that the Intel chip’s advantages are limited to narrow, latency-sensitive scenarios.

The Cinebench R23 multicore result deserves special attention. AMD scores 13,013, Intel scores 12,981, for a delta of just 0.2%. This is effectively a statistical tie. Given that the AMD part has 12 threads and a much higher base clock, one might expect a larger gap. The fact that the Intel part, with only 6 threads and a 1.50 GHz base clock, matches the AMD part in this benchmark indicates that the Intel architecture’s single-thread efficiency is very high. The Intel part’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz is lower than AMD’s 5.00 GHz, yet it still delivers comparable Cinebench R23 performance, which suggests superior per-clock execution.

The Verdict

The data indicates two different buyer profiles. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is for users who prioritize parallel throughput. Its 12 threads, dual-channel memory, and higher TDP deliver decisive wins in data compression, encryption, integer math, and multithreaded PassMark scores. The 84th percentile ranking and average score of 33,542 place it alongside processors like the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS, with deltas of 0% and -0.4% respectively. This is a processor for content creation, software compilation, and heavy multitasking.

The Intel Core 5 315 is for users who value efficiency and single-thread responsiveness. Its 15 W TDP and single-channel memory make it suitable for thin-and-light devices where battery life and thermals matter more than raw throughput. Its 72nd percentile ranking and average score of 18,188 put it near the Intel Core i7-9700 and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U, with deltas of 0% and 0.1%. The higher PassMark single-thread score and the win in Cinebench R23 single-core indicate that casual workloads, web browsing, and office applications will feel snappy. The prime numbers and physics wins further suggest strengths in specific scientific or simulation tasks.

The close Cinebench R23 multicore result complicates the narrative. If a user’s primary application is modern rendering, the two parts are interchangeable in performance, and the decision would rest on platform features. However, for legacy workloads or highly parallel data processing, the AMD part is overwhelmingly superior. The Intel part’s lower memory bandwidth and lack of threads are clear handicaps in these scenarios. The recorded data does not support any recommendation for the Intel part in multi-threaded heavy tasks, as its 48.4% deficit in PassMark multithread and 83.4% deficit in data compression are too large to ignore.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 315 has 6 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 leads in PassMark single-thread with a score of 4,021 versus AMD’s 3,675, a delta of 8.6%. Intel also leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with 1,832 versus 1,742, a 4.9% margin.

Q: Which processor wins in data compression?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 wins decisively with a PassMark data compression score of 267,963 versus Intel’s 146,143, a delta of 83.4%.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: They are nearly identical. AMD scores 13,013 and Intel scores 12,981, a delta of just 0.2% in favor of AMD.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth capabilities?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses a dual-channel DDR5 bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 315 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 315 has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 240 | Intel Core 5 315 |

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

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 4.30 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Not specified |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 760M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not specified |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-04-15 |