AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 records an average benchmark score of 33,542, placing it at the 84th percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 360 averages 18,374, which corresponds to the 72nd percentile.

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 360 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 sits within 0.4% of the Intel Core i3-13100, the Intel Core 5 330, the Intel Core i3-14100, and the Intel Core 3 305. Its average score of 18,374 is essentially tied with the Core i3-13100 at 18,380.

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

A: The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen 5 240 scores 73,189 versus 34,238 for the Intel Core 7 360, a delta of 113.8% in favor of AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 360 win any multi-threaded tests?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 7 360 wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with 13,634 against the AMD Ryzen 5 240's 13,013, a 4.6% advantage. It also wins PassMark physics with 1,213 versus 1,060.

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread PassMark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 records 4,274 in PassMark single-thread, which is 14% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 240's 3,675.

Q: How do the two processors compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 supports dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 360 uses single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s, a substantial gap in memory throughput.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It integrates 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process fabricated by Intel; its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Core configurations differ significantly. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads. This thread disparity stems from simultaneous multithreading on the AMD side. Base clocks also diverge sharply: the Ryzen 5 240 runs at 4.30 GHz base with a 5.00 GHz boost, while the Core 7 360 has a 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The AMD chip carries a 45 W TDP, the Intel chip a 15 W TDP.

Cache layouts are distinct. The AMD processor provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel processor provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support also differs: AMD lists DDR5 with dual-channel operation, while Intel lists DDR5 and LPDDR5X with single-channel operation.

PCIe connectivity favors AMD with Gen 4 and 20 lanes (CPU only), versus Intel's Gen 4 and 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 760M, while Intel uses the Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Both processors are mobile parts, active in production, and locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 wins 9 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 7 360 wins 6. The distribution of wins reveals a clear pattern: AMD dominates in multi-threaded throughput and memory-intensive workloads, while Intel excels in single-threaded and physics-oriented tasks.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 240 scores 2,078 against Intel's 1,374, a 51.2% margin. The single-core R15 test shows a similar story: AMD at 270 versus Intel at 193, a 39.9% advantage. These older Cinebench versions heavily favor the AMD part's higher base clock and extra threads.

Cinebench R23 flips the result. The Intel Core 7 360 scores 13,634 in multi-core versus 13,013 for AMD, a 4.6% win. In R23 single-core, Intel leads 1,924 versus 1,742, a 9.5% margin. The newer Cinebench version appears to reward the Intel architecture's efficiency characteristics.

PassMark integer math shows the largest gap: AMD scores 73,189 versus Intel's 34,238, a 113.8% delta. Data compression also heavily favors AMD at 267,963 versus 142,877, an 87.5% margin. Random string sorting follows with AMD at 32,385 versus 17,636, an 83.6% difference. Extended instructions show AMD at 20,201 versus 12,390, a 63% lead. Data encryption gives AMD 15,849 versus 11,164, a 42% advantage.

The Intel Core 7 360 counters in PassMark single-thread with 4,274 versus 3,675, a 14% win. Find prime numbers favors Intel at 120 versus 70, a 41.7% margin. PassMark physics goes to Intel at 1,213 versus 1,060, a 12.6% lead. Floating point math is nearly tied: AMD at 45,301 versus Intel at 44,963, a 0.8% margin for AMD.

PassMark multi-thread confirms AMD's overall throughput advantage: 22,658 versus 15,544, a 45.8% lead.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ.

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 240 | Intel Core 7 360 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 4.30 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Not recorded |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Wildcat Lake |

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

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | Not recorded |

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

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

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

| 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 (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

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

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

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $426 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 wins in workloads that scale with thread count and memory bandwidth. The 12 threads versus 6 threads gives it a decisive edge in integer math, data compression, random string sorting, and extended instructions. Its 89.6 GB/s dual-channel memory bandwidth supports this pattern: data-heavy tasks see a 42% to 113.8% advantage over the Intel part. The older Cinebench R15 tests also favor AMD, with multi-core and single-core leads of 51.2% and 39.9%, respectively.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in tasks that favor single-thread execution and lower latency. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4,274 is 14% higher than AMD's 3,675. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 9.5% lead, and the newer multi-core test gives Intel a 4.6% win despite the thread disadvantage. Prime number finding shows a 41.7% lead, and physics simulation gives Intel a 12.6% margin. These results suggest the Intel core design, despite a much lower base clock, extracts more performance per thread. The 15 W TDP also indicates significantly lower power draw, which can be relevant for thermal-constrained mobile designs. The 3 nm Intel process and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches likely contribute to these single-thread results.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen 5 240 is the stronger choice for multi-threaded throughput. Its 12 threads, dual-channel memory, and higher base clock produce decisive leads in integer math, data compression, and encryption. The 84th percentile ranking versus the 72nd percentile for Intel reinforces this position. The average benchmark score of 33,542 versus 18,374 puts AMD ahead by roughly 82%, and the nearest rival comparison shows AMD trading within 0.5% of processors like the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS. The Intel Core 7 360 sits in a lower performance tier, matching the Intel Core i3-13100 and Core i3-14100.

The Intel Core 7 360 is the better fit for single-thread-sensitive workloads and power-conscious designs. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4,274 exceeds many desktop-class parts, and its 15 W TDP is one-third of the AMD part's 45 W. The 3 nm process and larger L1/L2 caches support this efficiency profile. However, the single-channel memory bus and missing SMT limit its multi-threaded ceiling. The launch MSRP of $426 positions it as a premium mobile part, yet the benchmark data shows the AMD part outperforming it in the majority of tests.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the AMD Ryzen 5 240 delivers. For workloads dominated by single-thread response or constrained by power budgets, the Intel Core 7 360 offers a meaningful alternative. The recorded data does not show a single processor winning across all categories; the choice depends on workload mix and power constraints.