AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive verdict: the AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins 9 of the 15 recorded comparisons, and its victories are often by overwhelming margins. The Intel Core 5 320 takes 6 wins, but they are concentrated in single-threaded and light-load workloads. The overall average benchmark score reflects this split, with the AMD part at 38221 compared to 18023 for the Intel part, a gap that places the Ryzen 7 250 in the 86th percentile of all CPUs versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 320.

The most lopsided result appears in integer math. The Ryzen 7 250 scores 91565 against 32323 for the Intel Core 5 320, a 183.3% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the head-to-head set. Multi-core rendering follows a similar pattern: in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 14676 versus 6197, a 136.8% lead, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core the margin is 118.4% (2302 versus 1054). These are not close contests; the Ryzen 7 250 roughly doubles the Intel part in heavily threaded workloads.

Data compression shows a 102.1% advantage for the AMD processor (300708 versus 148779), while random string sorting is close behind at 98.8% (35861 versus 18038). Extended instruction throughput favors AMD by 63% (21613 versus 13262), and data encryption by 60.8% (17661 versus 10984). The PassMark multi-thread score gives AMD a 62.4% lead (25089 versus 15450), and floating point math adds another AMD win at 25.6% (53285 versus 42440).

The Intel Core 5 320 counters in single-threaded work. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1926 beats the AMD 1715 by 11%, and its Cinebench R15 single-core score of 276 edges the AMD 269 by 2.5%. PassMark single-thread results show Intel ahead by 9.1% (4045 versus 3678). The Intel part also wins PassMark physics (1221 versus 1147, a 6.1% margin) and find prime numbers (110 versus 73, a 33.6% margin). These wins confirm that the Intel core design holds a single-thread advantage, but the narrow margins in several of these tests contrast sharply with AMD's dominant multi-core leads.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the stronger overall processor, and the margin is substantial. Its average benchmark score of 38221 is more than double the Intel Core 5 320's 18023. For any workload that scales across cores, from rendering to compression to encryption, the AMD part is the clear choice. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.10 GHz boost clock delivers results that the Intel 6-core, 6-thread design cannot match in parallel tasks.

The Intel Core 5 320 is competitive only where single-thread performance dominates. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1926 and PassMark single-thread score of 4045 are the best numbers in this comparison. Users running lightly threaded applications, or workloads that are latency-sensitive rather than throughput-sensitive, would see a benefit from the Intel part. The 33.6% lead in find prime numbers also suggests an advantage in certain integer-heavy single-threaded algorithms.

However, the breadth of AMD's wins matters more than the depth of Intel's. Nine wins against six, with the AMD victories often exceeding 100% deltas while Intel's largest win is 33.6%, means the Ryzen 7 250 is the more balanced and capable processor for general use. The percentile ranking reinforces this: 86th percentile versus 72nd. The data does not support choosing the Intel part unless the workload is specifically single-threaded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has an average benchmark score of 38221, compared to 18023 for the Intel Core 5 320.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap between the two?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 14676 against 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, an advantage of 136.8%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD lead is 118.4% (2302 versus 1054).

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

A: Yes. The Intel part wins Cinebench R15 single-core, Cinebench R23 single-core, PassMark find prime numbers, PassMark physics, and PassMark single-thread (two identical single-thread entries in the data).

Q: What is the single-thread score difference?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 scores 4045 in PassMark single-thread versus 3678 for the AMD Ryzen 7 250, a 9.1% Intel lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel leads 1926 to 1715, an 11% margin.

Q: How do the processors compare in data compression?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 300708 in PassMark data compression, which is 102.1% higher than the Intel Core 5 320's 148779.

Q: Which processor has the higher percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 5 320 is in the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 5 320 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD base clock is 3.30 GHz and boost clock is 5.10 GHz; the Intel part runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. Thermal design power also diverges: 28 W for AMD versus 15 W for Intel.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The AMD chip supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel processor provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only).

Cache allocations are structured differently. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 5 320 lists 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

The integrated graphics solutions are distinct: the AMD part uses Radeon 780M, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). Both are mobile-market processors in active production. The AMD part carries the part number 100-000001722, and the Intel part is SAE3H. The Intel Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is built on Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is fabricated on a 3 nm Intel process. The AMD processor has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die; the database records no transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

The core count difference reflects a fundamental design split: AMD uses 8 cores with simultaneous multithreading for 16 threads, while Intel uses 6 cores without hyperthreading for 6 threads. The AMD L3 cache of 16 MB shared is more than double the Intel 6 MB shared L3. The AMD part also carries a higher TDP of 28 W versus 15 W, which aligns with its higher clock speeds and wider memory bus.

Process node and foundry also differ: TSMC 4 nm for AMD versus Intel 3 nm for the Intel part. The release dates are distinct, with the AMD processor dated 2025-01-05 and the Intel processor dated 2026-04-15. The AMD generation is listed as "Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 (Hawk Point))" and the Intel generation as "Core 5 (Wildcat Lake)". Both are mobile segments with active production status.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 dominates in every throughput-oriented category. Integer math (183.3% lead), Cinebench R23 multi-core (136.8%), Cinebench R15 multi-core (118.4%), data compression (102.1%), and random string sorting (98.8%) all favor AMD by massive margins. Encryption (60.8%), extended instructions (63%), multi-thread (62.4%), and floating point math (25.6%) round out the AMD sweep of parallel workloads. This processor is the choice for rendering, video encoding, data processing, compression tasks, and any workload that can use 16 threads.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in single-threaded and light-load scenarios. Its Cinebench R23 single-core lead of 11% and PassMark single-thread lead of 9.1% indicate faster per-core execution. The find prime numbers result (33.6% ahead) and physics score (6.1% ahead) reinforce this pattern. For applications that are latency-bound, run on one or two threads, or depend on peak single-core speed, the Intel part delivers better results despite its lower core count and thread count.

The overall data points to a clear division: AMD for parallel throughput, Intel for single-thread responsiveness. The AMD Ryzen 7 250's 9 wins, higher average score, and 86th percentile ranking make it the stronger all-around processor, while the Intel Core 5 320's 6 wins define a narrower but real niche in single-threaded performance.