AMD Ryzen 5 8600G vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a decisive overall win for the AMD Ryzen 5 8600G, which takes 14 of the 17 shared tests. The Intel Core 5 320 wins only three, and those come in narrowly defined single-thread or specialized workloads.

The largest margin belongs to Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the AMD part scores 21,503 against the Intel part’s 6,197, a 247% advantage. That gap dwarfs the other Cinebench results, but the pattern holds across every multi-threaded test. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the AMD chip leads 9,031 to 5,462, a 65.3% delta. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the margin is 105.6%, with scores of 2,167 versus 1,054.

PassMark integer math shows a 138.4% lead for the AMD processor, scoring 77,042 against 32,323. Data compression favors the AMD part by 97.1%, with 293,306 versus 148,779. Random string sorting is nearly as lopsided: 35,067 versus 18,038, a 94.4% delta. Extended instructions give the AMD chip a 70.5% edge, and data encryption shows a 56.4% lead.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G also wins the single-core Cinebench tests, though by smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3,035 against 1,926, a 57.6% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1,274 versus 771, a 65.2% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core is closer: 305 versus 276, a 10.5% edge.

PassMark single-thread is where the Intel Core 5 320 takes one of its wins. It scores 4,045 against the AMD part’s 3,878, a 4.1% advantage. The Intel chip also wins PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 110 versus 96, a 12.7% margin. These are the only two head-to-head victories for the Intel part, and neither reflects a broad performance trend.

Remaining AMD wins include PassMark multi-thread (25,294 versus 15,450, a 63.7% delta), floating-point math (47,919 versus 42,440, a 12.9% delta), and physics (1,450 versus 1,221, an 18.8% delta). The overall average benchmark score confirms the split: the AMD Ryzen 5 8600G sits at 24,089, while the Intel Core 5 320 sits at 18,023.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G uses the Zen 4 architecture under the codename Phoenix, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. It is a desktop part for AMD Socket AM5, released in January 2024, with an unlocked multiplier.

The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. It is a mobile part for Intel BGA 1516, with a locked multiplier and a release date of April 2026. The Intel part has no listed architecture family beyond the codename, and no transistor count or die size in the database.

Core counts are identical at 6, but thread counts differ. The AMD chip has 12 threads via simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel chip has 6 threads, meaning one thread per core. That difference alone explains much of the multi-threaded benchmark gap.

Cache layouts diverge sharply. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 5 320 provides 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part’s larger L3 and per-core L2 give it a structural advantage in workloads that repeatedly access the same data.

Clock speeds also favor the AMD chip. Its base clock is 4.30 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz. The Intel chip has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost of 4.60 GHz. The lower base clock suggests a design optimized for power efficiency rather than sustained heavy load.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD part uses dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only in single-channel mode, with a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. PCIe lanes also differ: the AMD chip has 20 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel chip has 6 Gen 4 lanes.

Integrated graphics are present on both. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G carries a Radeon 760M, while the Intel Core 5 320 carries Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so any comparison there would be speculative.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 320 boosts to 4.60 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 support multithreading?

A: No. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, so each core handles one thread. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What memory configurations do the two support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G supports dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only in single-channel mode, with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G scores 21,503, which is 247% higher than the Intel Core 5 320’s 6,197.

Q: Which processor wins PassMark single-thread?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 scores 4,045, a 4.1% advantage over the AMD Ryzen 5 8600G’s 3,878.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G uses a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 320 uses a 3 nm process at Intel.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G delivers substantially higher multi-threaded throughput across every Cinebench and PassMark multi-thread test, often by double-digit or triple-digit percentages. Its 12 threads, larger cache, and higher clocks give it an unambiguous advantage in any workload that scales across cores.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins only in PassMark single-thread and find prime numbers. Those wins are real but narrow, and they do not compensate for the multi-threaded deficit. The Intel chip’s 72nd percentile ranking versus all CPUs sits below the AMD chip’s 76th percentile, and its average benchmark score of 18,023 trails the AMD part’s 24,089.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G also offers a desktop socket with an unlocked multiplier, dual-channel memory, and more PCIe lanes. The Intel Core 5 320 is a mobile part with a locked multiplier, single-channel memory, and fewer PCIe lanes. For anyone prioritizing compute performance from the recorded data, the AMD processor is the stronger choice.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category.

• Threads: AMD Ryzen 5 8600G has 12 threads; Intel Core 5 320 has 6.
• Base clock: AMD 4.30 GHz; Intel 1.50 GHz.
• Boost clock: AMD 5.00 GHz; Intel 4.60 GHz.
• TDP: AMD 65 W; Intel 15 W.
• Socket: AMD Socket AM5; Intel BGA 1516.
• Process node: AMD 4 nm (TSMC); Intel 3 nm (Intel foundry).
• L1 cache: AMD 64 KB per core; Intel 192 KB total.
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core; Intel 2.5 MB total.
• L3 cache: AMD 16 MB shared; Intel 6 MB shared.
• Memory support: AMD DDR5 dual-channel; Intel DDR5 and LPDDR5X single-channel.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 83.2 GB/s; Intel 59.7 GB/s.
• PCIe: AMD Gen 4, 20 lanes; Intel Gen 4, 6 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 760M; Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe).
• Market segment: AMD Desktop; Intel Mobile.
• Release date: AMD January 2024; Intel April 2026.
• Multiplier: AMD unlocked; Intel locked.
• Transistors: AMD 25,000 million; Intel not listed.
• Die size: AMD 178 mm²; Intel not listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G wins in all multi-threaded productivity workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core, R20 multi-core, and R15 multi-core all show the AMD part ahead by margins from 65.3% to 247%. PassMark multi-thread, integer math, data compression, random string sorting, extended instructions, data encryption, floating-point math, and physics all favor the AMD chip. This makes it the clear choice for rendering, compilation, data processing, and any parallel compute task.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in two specific PassMark tests. PassMark single-thread shows a 4.1% advantage, and PassMark find prime numbers shows a 12.7% advantage. These wins indicate that the Intel chip has a slight edge in lightweight single-threaded operations and in a specialized prime-number search algorithm. The Intel chip also has a lower TDP of 15 W versus the AMD part’s 65 W, which suggests it is designed for constrained thermal environments, though the database does not provide battery life or power draw measurements.

For general desktop use, the AMD Ryzen 5 8600G’s dual-channel memory, 20 PCIe lanes, and unlocked multiplier offer more platform flexibility. The Intel Core 5 320’s mobile socket and single-channel memory limit its expansion potential. The benchmark data does not support using the Intel part for heavy multi-threaded work; it only shows an advantage in narrow single-thread scenarios.