CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT and Intel Core 7 350 present a fascinating study in contrasting design philosophies. The data shows a clear split: the AMD part dominates multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel chip showcases a remarkable single-thread advantage. Across the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the Ryzen 5 3600XT secures 13 wins, leaving the Intel Core 7 350 with 4. This is not a simple generational clash but a fundamental difference in what each processor prioritizes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT scores 15776, a staggering 96.5% ahead of the Intel Core 7 350’s 8030. This near-doubling of performance is the single largest margin in the entire comparison. The gap narrows in Cinebench R20 multi-core, but the AMD still leads by 23.3% (6625 vs 5373). Even in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen maintains a 30.3% advantage (1590 vs 1220). This pattern strongly indicates a massive throughput advantage for the AMD chip when all cores are engaged.

However, the story flips dramatically in single-threaded tests. The Intel Core 7 350 wins PassMark single-thread with a score of 4100, beating the AMD's 2752 by 32.9%. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Intel chip also wins, scoring 292 against the AMD's 224, a 23.3% lead. Yet, the AMD fights back in the single-core tests that favor it. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the AMD wins 935 to 758, a 23.4% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD also takes the win, 2227 to 2046, an 8.8% lead. This inconsistency in single-thread results is curious; Intel's wins in PassMark are decisive, but AMD's wins in Cinebench suggest the Ryzen's architecture is not universally slower in single-threaded tasks.

Beyond Cinebench, the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT shows its strength in integer-heavy and data-processing tasks. It leads by 52.4% in PassMark integer math (51416 vs 33734), by 44.8% in random string sorting (24960 vs 17238), and by 61.2% in data compression (230645 vs 143123). The Intel Core 7 350’s sole other victory is a significant one: PassMark floating-point math, where it wins 42809 to 30149, a 29.6% lead. The data suggests the Intel chip has a powerful floating-point unit, while the AMD excels at general integer processing and memory-intensive operations.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural choices explain the benchmark divide. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT is a desktop part built on TSMC's 7 nm process, with the Zen 2 architecture (codename Matisse 2). It features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its cache configuration includes 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, along with a substantial 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 7 350, in contrast, is a mobile processor built on Intel's 3 nm process, using the Wildcat Lake architecture. It has 6 cores but only 6 threads, with a much lower base clock of 1.50 GHz but a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its cache is configured differently, with 192 KB of L1 and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

These differences are stark. The AMD's 12 threads versus Intel's 6 threads is a primary factor in the multi-core performance gap. The much larger 32 MB L3 cache on the AMD likely helps in data-heavy workloads, while the Intel's smaller 6 MB L3 may be a bottleneck. The process node differences (7 nm vs 3 nm) and the Intel's higher boost clock contribute to its single-thread wins. The Intel chip also uses a single-channel memory bus, while the AMD uses a dual-channel bus, which could impact memory-sensitive tasks, though the Intel's DDR5 support offers a higher theoretical bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s compared to the AMD's 51.2 GB/s with DDR4.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark results, the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT is the clear winner for multi-threaded productivity. Its 96.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 52.4% lead in integer math make it the superior choice for video rendering, software compilation, and other workloads that scale with core count and thread count. The data also shows it handles data compression and encryption significantly better, with leads of 61.2% and 33.6% respectively, making it strong for file archiving and database tasks. Its performance in PassMark multithread (18562 vs 15170, a 22.4% lead) reinforces this.

The Intel Core 7 350 wins in specific, lighter workloads. Its 32.9% lead in PassMark single-thread suggests it would excel in applications that rely on a few fast cores, such as basic office work, web browsing, and certain legacy software. Its huge 29.6% lead in floating-point math makes it a potential candidate for scientific simulations or financial modeling that are heavily dependent on FPU performance. However, its lower multi-core scores indicate it would struggle in heavy multitasking or content creation. The Intel chip also has integrated graphics (Intel Xe3 Graphics), which the AMD lacks, but the benchmark data provided does not include graphics tests, so this cannot be analyzed here.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT is the superior processor for heavy, multi-threaded workloads. It wins 13 out of 17 benchmarks, including the most demanding ones. The 96.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is a decisive statement. For users whose primary tasks involve rendering, encoding, or compiling, the AMD part is the clear choice. Its average benchmark score of 17891 is also slightly higher than the Intel's 17779, and it sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs, just like the Intel chip.

The Intel Core 7 350, however, is not without merit. Its wins in PassMark single-thread and floating-point math are significant. It is a more efficient mobile part with a 15W TDP, compared to the AMD's 95W TDP. For users who prioritize battery life in a laptop or need a processor for lighter, single-threaded tasks, the Intel chip could be a better fit. The data shows it is a specialist for specific single-thread and FPU-heavy tasks, while the AMD is a generalist that excels in almost everything else. The Intel's launch MSRP is $469, while the AMD's is $249.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT is significantly faster, leading by 96.5% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (15776 vs 8030) and by 23.3% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (6625 vs 5373).

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded tests?

A: It depends on the test. The Intel Core 7 350 wins PassMark single-thread by 32.9% (4100 vs 2752), but the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 23.4% (935 vs 758) and Cinebench R23 single-core by 8.8% (2227 vs 2046).

Q: What is the most significant architectural difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT has 12 threads (6 cores), while the Intel Core 7 350 has only 6 threads (6 cores). Additionally, the AMD has a much larger shared L3 cache of 32 MB compared to the Intel's 6 MB.

Q: Which CPU wins in floating-point math?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 wins decisively, scoring 42809 in PassMark floating-point math, which is 29.6% higher than the AMD's 30149.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 17891, compared to the Intel Core 7 350's 17779. Both are within 0.6% of each other.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT | Intel Core 7 350 |

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

| Series | 3000 series | null |

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Cores | 6 | 6 |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | null |

| Codename | Matisse 2 | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 3,800 million | null |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | null |

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

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | null | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2019-07-06 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $249 | $469 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | true | false |

| Part Number | 100-100000281 | SAE3F |