AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into clearly different roles. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 320 takes 4. The AMD part delivers substantially higher multi-threaded throughput, with its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19742 sitting 218.6% above the Intel part's 6197. For workloads that scale across cores, such as rendering, compilation, or heavy data processing, the AMD processor is the clear choice from the recorded measurements.

The Intel Core 5 320 does hold advantages in specific single-threaded and lightweight tasks. It wins PassMark single-thread testing with a score of 4045 versus 3858, a 4.6% margin, and it also leads in prime number finding and physics simulation. Those wins are narrow in percentage terms compared to AMD's multi-core dominance, but they indicate that the Intel part handles latency-sensitive or lightly threaded workloads competitively.

The average benchmark score separates the two clearly: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS records 30879, while the Intel Core 5 320 records 18023. The AMD chip also sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, versus the 72nd percentile for the Intel chip. Buyers seeking sustained multi-core performance for professional mobile workloads should select the AMD part based on this data. Buyers prioritizing single-thread responsiveness and lower power draw may find the Intel part sufficient, though its overall throughput is significantly lower.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS dominates multi-core tests. It scores 19742 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, a 218.6% advantage. The AMD part also leads PassMark multi-thread testing with 23569 versus 15450, a 52.6% margin.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 4 of the 17 head-to-head tests: PassMark find prime numbers (110 versus 73), PassMark physics (1221 versus 1208), PassMark single-thread (4045 versus 3858), and the duplicate PassMark singlethread test with the same result.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD part wins all three Cinebench single-core tests. Its Cinebench R15 single-core score is 280 versus 276, a 1.4% margin. In R20, AMD scores 1170 versus 771, a 51.8% margin. In R23, AMD scores 2787 versus 1926, a 44.7% margin.

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

A: Both have 6 cores. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS supports 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 320 supports 6 threads. The AMD part's thread count is a major factor in its multi-core wins.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS has a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 5 320 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: How do the integrated graphics differ?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS uses the Radeon 760M, while the Intel Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The benchmark data does not include graphics tests, so no direct performance comparison is possible from the recorded measurements.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS belongs to the 8000 series and uses the Zen 4 architecture under the codename Hawk Point. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC and contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 320 belongs to the Core 5 generation under the codename Wildcat Lake and is manufactured on a 3 nm process by Intel. The process node difference gives Intel a smaller transistor geometry, but the database does not record a transistor count or die size for the Intel part, so a direct density comparison is not possible.

The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1516. Both target the mobile market segment, and both have a production status of Active. The AMD processor was released on 2024-04-15, while the Intel processor has a release date of 2026-04-15.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache total, 2.5 MB of L2 cache total, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's larger shared L3 cache gives it more on-die storage for frequently accessed data.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD part supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The Intel part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory but only over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, and it does not support ECC memory. The AMD part also provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides PCIe Gen 4 with only 6 lanes from the CPU. These differences make the AMD platform more suitable for memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads and configurations requiring more expansion lanes.

Specification Differences

The two processors share a 6-core count, but diverge on nearly every other specification field. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS has 12 threads versus 6 threads for the Intel Core 5 320. The AMD base clock is 4.30 GHz versus 1.50 GHz for Intel, and the AMD boost clock is 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz for Intel. The AMD part has a 45 W TDP, while the Intel part has a 15 W TDP, indicating significantly different power envelopes.

The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1516. Process nodes differ: 4 nm for AMD at TSMC versus 3 nm for Intel at its own foundry. The AMD part has a listed transistor count of 25,000 million and a die size of 178 mm²; no such figures are recorded for the Intel part.

Cache configurations differ per the architecture section: L1 of 64 KB per core for AMD versus 192 KB total for Intel, L2 of 1 MB per core for AMD versus 2.5 MB total for Intel, and L3 of 16 MB shared for AMD versus 6 MB shared for Intel. Memory support differs: DDR5 dual-channel for AMD versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 59.7 GB/s for Intel. ECC support is present on AMD and absent on Intel. PCIe lane counts are 20 for AMD versus 6 for Intel, both Gen 4.

Integrated graphics differ: Radeon 760M for AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores for Intel. The AMD part has two recorded part numbers, 100-000001315 (FP7r2) and 100-000001388 (FP7), while the Intel part has one part number, SAE3H. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $340, stated once here, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows the largest separations. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS scores 19742 against 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, a 218.6% delta. That is the single largest percentage gap in the entire benchmark set. Cinebench R23 single-core also favors AMD, 2787 versus 1926, a 44.7% margin. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows AMD at 8291 versus 5462, a 51.8% margin, and Cinebench R20 single-core shows the same 51.8% delta with scores of 1170 versus 771. Cinebench R15 multi-core gives AMD 1989 versus 1054, an 88.7% margin, while R15 single-core is nearly tied at 280 versus 276, a 1.4% margin.

PassMark integer math is another major AMD win. The AMD part scores 72740 versus 32323 for Intel, a 125% margin. PassMark random string sorting favors AMD with 35472 versus 18038, a 96.7% margin. PassMark data compression shows AMD at 265826 versus 148779, a 78.7% margin. PassMark extended instructions gives AMD 21212 versus 13262, a 59.9% margin. PassMark data encryption gives AMD 17387 versus 10984, a 58.3% margin. PassMark multithread gives AMD 23569 versus 15450, a 52.6% margin. PassMark floating point math is closer, with AMD at 45481 versus 42440, a 7.2% margin.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins four tests, all by smaller margins. PassMark find prime numbers gives Intel 110 versus 73, a 33.6% margin in Intel's favor. PassMark physics gives Intel 1221 versus 1208, a 1.1% margin. PassMark single-thread gives Intel 4045 versus 3858, a 4.6% margin, and the duplicate PassMark singlethread test records the identical result. These wins are notable but do not offset the scale of AMD's multi-core advantages.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS wins in every Cinebench test, every PassMark data-processing test, and the multithread and integer math tests. Its 12-thread configuration, dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and larger 16 MB L3 cache align with the workloads that dominate these benchmarks. Rendering, content creation, software compilation, data compression, encryption, and any workload that can use more than 6 threads will favor the AMD part based on the recorded deltas. The 218.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the strongest signal: heavily parallel workloads should use the AMD processor.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in prime number finding, physics simulation, and single-thread PassMark tests. Its 15 W TDP, compared to 45 W for AMD, indicates a lower power envelope for thermally constrained mobile designs. The single-thread win of 4045 versus 3858, a 4.6% margin, suggests the Intel part has competitive lightly threaded performance, and the physics win of 1221 versus 1208, a 1.1% margin, is effectively a tie. The prime number win of 110 versus 73, a 33.6% margin, is the most decisive Intel victory and points to workloads with simple integer loops that do not scale across threads.

The overall data supports a clear split: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS for multi-threaded throughput and memory-heavy tasks, the Intel Core 5 320 for low-power designs with light or single-threaded workloads. The 13-to-4 win count and the average benchmark score gap of 30879 versus 18023 make the AMD part the higher-performance option in the database's measurements.