AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT and the Intel Core 5 320 is heavily tilted toward the AMD part in raw workload coverage. Of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Ryzen 5 5500GT wins 11, while the Core 5 320 takes 6. The AMD chip dominates in multi-threaded rendering, integer math, memory-heavy tasks, and data processing, while the Intel chip claims victories in single-threaded tests, prime number finding, floating-point math, and physics simulations.

The Ryzen 5 5500GT is the clear choice for content creation and heavily threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 15,848 against the Intel part’s 6,197, a massive 155.7% advantage. That gap is not a marginal edge; it is a full generational class difference. Cinebench R15 multicore shows a similar story at 1,597 versus 1,054, a 51.5% lead. Cinebench R20 multicore gives the AMD chip 6,656 against 5,462, a 21.9% margin. The pattern is consistent: when all cores are active, the Ryzen 5 5500GT pulls ahead substantially.

PassMark integer math is another decisive AMD win. The Ryzen 5 5500GT scores 64,218 against 32,323 for the Intel Core 5 320, a 98.7% advantage. This nearly doubles the throughput in integer-heavy operations. Data compression also favors AMD heavily: 243,904 versus 148,779, a 63.9% lead. Data encryption follows at 14,754 versus 10,984, a 34.3% edge. Extended instruction workloads go to AMD as well, 17,027 versus 13,262, a 28.4% margin. Random string sorting, a test sensitive to memory latency and cache behavior, shows a 36.3% AMD advantage at 24,583 versus 18,038.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in areas where single-core frequency and specific instruction efficiency matter. PassMark single-thread shows 4,045 for Intel against 3,066 for AMD, a 24.2% lead. Cinebench R15 singlecore gives Intel 276 versus 225, an 18.5% edge. Prime number finding is a standout Intel win: 110 versus 54, a 50.9% advantage. Floating-point math goes to Intel at 42,440 versus 36,694, a 13.5% margin. Physics simulation also favors Intel, 1,221 versus 840, a 31.2% lead.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split. The Ryzen 5 5500GT averages 26,748 points across the database, placing it in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 320 averages 18,023 points, landing in the 72nd percentile. Neither chip is a slouch, but the AMD part sits meaningfully higher in the aggregate ranking.

Architecture Differences

These two processors come from opposite design philosophies and manufacturing ecosystems. The AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT uses the Zen 3 architecture on the Cezanne codename, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The database lists no transistor count or die size for the Intel part, indicating those figures are not published in the recorded data.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Ryzen 5 5500GT has 6 cores and 12 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core 5 320 also has 6 cores but only 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading support in the recorded specifications. This explains the Intel chip’s weaker multi-threaded performance despite having the same physical core count. Clock speeds tell a complementary story: the AMD chip runs at a 3.60 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, while the Intel part uses a 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The Intel base clock is very low, which likely contributes to its modest sustained multi-core showing, but its boost clock is 0.20 GHz higher, helping in single-threaded bursts.

Cache layouts are entirely different. The Ryzen 5 5500GT uses per-core L1 at 64 KB and per-core L2 at 512 KB, with a 16 MB L3 pool. The Intel Core 5 320 lists L1 at 192 KB total, L2 at 2.5 MB total, and 6 MB of shared L3. For multi-threaded workloads that repeatedly access shared data, the AMD chip has over two and a half times the L3 capacity. For latency-sensitive single-threaded tasks, the Intel cache hierarchy appears tuned differently.

Memory support diverges completely. The Ryzen 5 5500GT runs DDR4 on a dual-channel bus, delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus, rated at 59.7 GB/s. Despite the single channel, the newer memory standard gives Intel a small raw bandwidth advantage, though the AMD chip’s dual-channel configuration may offer better latency characteristics in certain workloads. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The AMD part uses Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part uses Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. For a desktop CPU, the AMD chip offers far more expansion capacity. For a mobile chip, the Intel part’s reduced lane count is typical of its segment.

The integrated graphics are another major split. The Ryzen 5 5500GT includes Radeon Vega 7 graphics. The Intel Core 5 320 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD chip is a desktop part on Socket AM4, while the Intel chip is a mobile part on BGA 1516. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel processor is locked. Release dates also differ: the Ryzen 5 5500GT launched in January 2024, the Intel Core 5 320 in April 2026.

The Verdict

The data points to two different buyers. The Ryzen 5 5500GT is a desktop processor with 12 threads, 16 MB of L3 cache, dual-channel DDR4, and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. It wins 11 of 17 head-to-head tests and sits in the 79th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 26,748 beats the Intel part’s 18,023 by roughly 48%. For multi-threaded rendering, data compression, integer math, and encryption, the AMD chip is decisively ahead.

The Intel Core 5 320 is a mobile processor with 6 threads, 6 MB of L3, single-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X, and 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. It wins 6 of 17 tests, all in single-threaded or specialized math workloads. Its 72nd percentile ranking is respectable, and its 4.60 GHz boost clock gives it the edge in tasks that rely on one core. Its low 15 W TDP, compared to the AMD chip’s 65 W, indicates a power-focused design.

The choice depends on the workload. If the task involves compiling, rendering, encoding, or heavy data processing, the Ryzen 5 5500GT is the stronger part by wide margins. If the task is lightly threaded and needs maximum single-core response, the Intel Core 5 320 holds the advantage, though its multicore deficit is severe. The Ryzen 5 5500GT is the better all-rounder in the recorded benchmark data, with a higher percentile, higher average score, and more wins.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT has 12 threads from 6 cores, while the Intel Core 5 320 has 6 threads from 6 cores. The AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading, the Intel part does not.

Q: How big is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD chip scores 15,848 against 6,197 for Intel, a 155.7% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the gap is 21.9%, and in Cinebench R15 multicore it is 51.5%.

Q: Which CPU wins in single-threaded tests?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 wins in single-threaded workloads. PassMark single-thread shows 4,045 for Intel versus 3,066 for AMD, a 24.2% lead. Cinebench R15 singlecore gives Intel a 18.5% edge at 276 versus 225.

Q: What memory types do these CPUs support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD chip is built on TSMC’s 7 nm process with 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The Intel chip uses Intel’s 3 nm process. The database lists no transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

Q: Which CPU has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core 5 320 provides 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT is Cinebench R23 multicore, where it scores 15,848 against the Intel Core 5 320’s 6,197, a 155.7% lead. This is not a close contest; the AMD chip more than doubles the Intel score. PassMark integer math is the second biggest AMD win at 64,218 versus 32,323, a 98.7% margin. Data compression follows at 243,904 versus 148,779, a 63.9% lead. Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 51.5% AMD advantage at 1,597 versus 1,054. Random string sorting gives AMD a 36.3% edge at 24,583 versus 18,038. Data encryption favors AMD by 34.3% at 14,754 versus 10,984. Extended instructions give AMD a 28.4% margin at 17,027 versus 13,262. PassMark multithread shows AMD ahead 23% at 19,000 versus 15,450. Cinebench R20 multicore gives AMD a 21.9% win at 6,656 versus 5,462. Cinebench R20 singlecore also favors AMD at 939 versus 771, a 21.8% margin. Cinebench R23 singlecore goes to AMD at 2,237 versus 1,926, a 16.1% lead.

The Intel Core 5 320’s biggest win is PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 110 against 54, a 50.9% advantage. PassMark single-thread is the second largest Intel win at 4,045 versus 3,066, a 24.2% margin. The same result appears for PassMark singlethread. Physics simulation favors Intel at 1,221 versus 840, a 31.2% lead. Cinebench R15 singlecore gives Intel a 18.5% edge at 276 versus 225. Floating-point math goes to Intel by 13.5% at 42,440 versus 36,694.

The pattern is clear. The AMD chip wins every Cinebench multicore test and most PassMark data-processing tests. The Intel chip wins the two single-thread tests, the prime number test, physics, and floating-point math. The AMD chip’s 12 threads and larger cache give it a decisive edge in sustained multi-core work. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock and newer process give it the edge in short single-thread bursts and specific math operations.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT | Intel Core 5 320 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 6 |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base clock | 3.60 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.40 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Not listed |

| Codename | Cezanne | Wildcat Lake |

| Process node | 7 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L1 cache | 64 KB per core | 192 KB total |

| L2 cache | 512 KB per core | 2.5 MB total |

| L3 cache | 16 MB | 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 3, 16 lanes | Gen 4, 6 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Vega 7 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | $125 | $340 |

The thread count difference is the most consequential specification. The AMD chip has double the threads, which directly explains its multi-core benchmark dominance. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock helps in single-threaded tests, but its lower base clock and lack of extra threads hurt sustained workloads. The process node difference, 7 nm versus 3 nm, favors Intel in efficiency, reflected in the 15 W versus 65 W TDP. The AMD chip uses a mature DDR4 platform with dual-channel bandwidth, while the Intel chip uses newer DDR5/LPDDR5X on a single channel. The Intel chip’s higher launch MSRP of $340 versus $125 for the AMD part is notable, though the two target different market segments.