AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX, which wins all 15 recorded comparisons against the Intel Core 5 315. The most dramatic margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 212,598 against Intel's 31,690, a difference of 570.9%. This is the largest delta in the entire dataset, and it reflects the fundamental gap in parallel execution resources between the two processors.

Data compression tells a similar story. The Ryzen 9 9955HX posts 731,998 in PassMark data compression versus 146,143 for the Core 5 315, a 400.9% lead. Extended instructions show a 340.9% advantage (57,946 versus 13,143), and random string sorting lands at 343.8% (77,890 versus 17,551). These workloads scale heavily with core count and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the AMD chip.

Cinebench multicore results confirm the trend. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ryzen 9 9955HX scores 37,159 while the Core 5 315 manages 12,981, a 186.3% gap. The older Cinebench R15 multicore test shows an even larger relative difference: 5,905 versus 1,308, or 351.5%. The AMD processor's 16 cores with 32 threads simply outmuscle the Intel part's 6 cores with 6 threads in every threaded workload recorded.

Single-thread performance narrows the gap considerably, though the AMD processor still wins every test. PassMark single-thread shows 4,393 versus 4,021, a modest 9.3% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Ryzen 9 9955HX a 2,174 score against Intel's 1,832, an 18.7% advantage. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows 336 versus 184, which translates to 82.6%, a surprisingly large margin for a single-threaded workload. The data suggests the Zen 5 architecture holds a meaningful IPC advantage over Wildcat Lake, at least in this benchmark suite.

Other PassMark subtests continue the pattern. Floating point math shows 136,682 versus 42,441, a 222.1% lead. Data encryption posts 37,330 versus 11,119, a 235.7% margin. Prime number finding delivers 287 versus 112, a 156.3% advantage. Physics simulation lands at 2,720 versus 1,163, a 133.9% gap. PassMark multithread, a comprehensive measure, shows 56,171 versus 15,272, or 267.8%.

The average benchmark score in the database amplifies the disparity. The Ryzen 9 9955HX carries an average score of 91,199, while the Core 5 315 averages 18,188. That places the AMD chip in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, versus the 72nd percentile for the Intel part. The nearest rivals for the AMD processor are the Intel Xeon 654 (90,717 average, 0.5% behind) and the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 (90,541, 0.7% behind). The Core 5 315, by contrast, sits exactly level with the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700, both at 18,189 and 18,180 respectively with 0% deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The data allocation is simple: the Ryzen 9 9955HX wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set, so there is no recorded workload where the Core 5 315 comes out ahead. The useful analysis therefore concerns the magnitude of the wins and what that implies for different use cases.

For heavily threaded productivity workloads, the Ryzen 9 9955HX is in another class. Data compression, integer math, extended instructions, and Cinebench multicore all show leads of 186% or higher. These tasks include video encoding, 3D rendering, software compilation, and large data transformations. The 32 threads of the AMD chip, paired with 64 MB of shared L3 cache, give it substantial headroom for parallel execution.

For lightly threaded tasks, the gap shrinks but remains in AMD's favor. PassMark single-thread shows only a 9.3% difference, and Cinebench R23 single-core is 18.7%. Applications like web browsing, office document editing, and lightweight coding would see a more modest difference between the two processors. The single-thread results also indicate that the Core 5 315 is not a weak performer in absolute terms; its 1,832 score in Cinebench R23 single-core is respectable for a low-power chip. The Ryzen 9 9955HX simply does more work per clock.

The Core 5 315 shows its strongest relative position in single-threaded tests, which aligns with its design as a 15 W part. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i7-1365U and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U, both with average scores within 0.1% of the Core 5 315. This places it in the efficient ultraportable class. The Ryzen 9 9955HX, with a 55 W TDP, targets high-performance mobile workstations and gaming laptops.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX averages 91,199 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Intel Core 5 315 averages 18,188. The AMD part sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database; the Intel part sits in the 72nd percentile.

Q: How large is the multicore performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ryzen 9 9955HX scores 37,159 versus 12,981 for the Core 5 315, a 186.3% lead. The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows a 351.5% gap (5,905 versus 1,308).

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 315 win any benchmark?

A: No. Across all 15 head-to-head comparisons in the database, the Ryzen 9 9955HX wins every single test. The closest margin is PassMark single-thread, where AMD leads by 9.3%.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: For the Ryzen 9 9955HX, the closest competitors are the Intel Xeon 654 (0.5% behind) and AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 (0.7% behind). For the Core 5 315, the nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700, both with 0% delta, followed by the Intel Core i7-1365U and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 0.1%.

Q: How do the single-thread scores compare?

A: PassMark single-thread gives the Ryzen 9 9955HX a 4,393 score versus 4,021 for the Core 5 315, a 9.3% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,174 versus 1,832, an 18.7% advantage. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows a larger 82.6% gap (336 versus 184).

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core 5 315?

A: The launch MSRP is $340. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field in the database. The Ryzen 9 9955HX uses 16 cores with 32 threads, while the Core 5 315 uses 6 cores with 6 threads. This means the Intel part has no hyperthreading support, a significant difference for multitasking and threaded workloads.

Clock speeds diverge substantially. The AMD chip has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Intel chip runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. The data does not include boost behavior under sustained load, but the raw figures show a 1.0 GHz higher boost clock for the AMD part.

Thermal design power differs by 40 W. The Ryzen 9 9955HX is rated at 55 W, while the Core 5 315 is rated at 15 W. This explains the performance gulf and also indicates very different target chassis: high-performance laptops for AMD, fanless or ultraportable designs for Intel.

Memory support and bandwidth show another major split. The Ryzen 9 9955HX supports DDR5 in dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in single-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory; the Intel chip does not.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD processor provides Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel processor provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes. This affects GPU bandwidth, NVMe storage options, and overall expandability. The socket types also differ: AMD Socket FL1 for the Ryzen 9 9955HX versus Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 315.

The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel part is locked. The integrated graphics differ as well: Radeon 610M on the AMD side versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on the Intel side. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible from this data.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 9 9955HX uses the Zen 5 architecture under the codename Fire Range, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on Intel's 3 nm process. The database does not list an architecture name for the Intel part beyond its codename and generation designation.

Transistor counts and die size are only recorded for the AMD chip: 16,630 million transistors across a 2x 70.6 mm² die configuration. The Intel part has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database. The AMD chip comes from the 9000 series, while the Intel chip has no series designation listed.

Cache configurations show a fundamental design difference. The Ryzen 9 9955HX has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 (the database does not specify per-core or total in the same format), 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD processor's 64 MB L3 is more than ten times larger than Intel's 6 MB, which partly explains the AMD advantage in data compression and random string sorting.

The AMD chip has an integrated Radeon 610M GPU, while the Intel chip has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Neither part's iGPU is benchmarked in the database, so the recorded data cannot assess graphics performance. The AMD processor also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel part, which matters for workstation-class reliability.

Both processors come from different foundries: TSMC for AMD and Intel for the Intel part. The release dates differ by over a year: the Ryzen 9 9955HX launched on 2025-01-05, while the Core 5 315 launched on 2026-04-15. Both are listed as Active in production status and both target the mobile market segment.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the choice straightforward for raw performance. The Ryzen 9 9955HX wins all 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with leads ranging from 9.3% in single-threaded PassMark to 570.9% in integer math. Its 96th percentile standing among all CPUs in the database, combined with an average score of 91,199, places it in the company of server-class Xeon and Ryzen AI Max+ parts. The Core 5 315, at the 72nd percentile with an 18,188 average, sits alongside older Core i7 and Ryzen 7 mobile chips.

The Core 5 315's case rests on efficiency and integration rather than performance. Its 15 W TDP is 40 W lower than the AMD part, which enables thinner, lighter, and quieter systems. Its support for LPDDR5X memory and single-channel bus points toward compact designs where battery life matters more than throughput. The 9.3% single-thread deficit in PassMark is modest, meaning everyday responsive tasks would feel similar on both platforms.

The Ryzen 9 9955HX demands more power and a larger chassis, but the data justifies that cost in threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multicore at 37,159 versus 12,981 indicates the AMD chip can handle content creation, simulation, and compilation tasks that the Intel part would struggle with. The 64 MB L3 cache and dual-channel memory bandwidth further support data-heavy workloads.

For users selecting a processor for high-throughput mobile work, the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX is the clear choice from the data. For users prioritizing portability, low power draw, and adequate single-thread performance, the Intel Core 5 315 has a defined role. The benchmark database records no scenario where the Intel chip wins, so the decision hinges entirely on whether the workload fits within the Intel part's capabilities.