AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 and Intel Core 5 320 split their 15 recorded benchmark comparisons almost evenly, with the AMD part taking 8 wins and the Intel part taking 7. However, the margin of victory is heavily lopsided in AMD's favor. The Ryzen AI 5 435 wins decisive multi-threaded and integer workloads, while the Intel Core 5 320 counters with narrow single-thread and physics wins.

The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ryzen AI 5 435 scores 11333 against Intel's 6197, an 82.9% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar pattern, with AMD at 1686 versus Intel at 1054, a 60% lead. PassMark integer math also heavily favors AMD, 61026 versus 32323, a difference of 88.8%. These results indicate that the Ryzen AI 5 435, with its 12 threads, delivers substantially higher throughput in heavily threaded rendering and arithmetic workloads.

The Intel Core 5 320's biggest wins are smaller in magnitude. Its best margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 110 against AMD's 58, a 47.3% advantage. That is a notable single-test win, but it represents a narrow workload. In single-thread tests, the Intel part leads consistently: Cinebench R23 single-core 1926 versus 1816 (5.7% ahead), Cinebench R15 single-core 276 versus 260 (5.8% ahead), and PassMark single-thread 4045 versus 3734 (7.7% ahead). PassMark physics also goes to Intel, 1221 versus 1075, a 12% lead. PassMark floating point math is close, with Intel ahead 42440 versus 40627, a 4.3% margin.

AMD's other wins include PassMark data compression (225374 versus 148779, 51.5% ahead), PassMark random string sorting (24891 versus 18038, 38% ahead), PassMark extended instructions (16197 versus 13262, 22.1% ahead), PassMark multithread (19000 versus 15450, 23% ahead), and PassMark data encryption (11110 versus 10984, 1.1% ahead). The encryption margin is nearly negligible, but the multithread and compression gaps are substantial.

Looking at overall average benchmark scores, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 records 28128, placing it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 320 averages 18023, placing it in the 72nd percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-13490F (average 28185, 0.2% behind AMD) and the Intel Core i5-14500T (average 28065, 0.2% ahead of AMD). The Intel Core 5 320's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (average 17994, 0.2% behind Intel) and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (average 17891, 0.7% behind Intel). The delta between the two processors in this comparison, roughly 56% in average score, is far larger than the gaps separating each from its closest competitors.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in architecture. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the codename Gorgon Point and the Ryzen AI 400 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c). The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename from the Core 5 generation, built on a 3 nm Intel process. Both are mobile parts, but the AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP8 while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1516.

Core and thread counts differ fundamentally. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core 5 320 provides 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading equivalent in this configuration. This explains the large multi-thread benchmark gaps. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD part has a 2.00 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock, while the Intel part has a 1.50 GHz base clock and a slightly higher 4.60 GHz boost clock. The higher boost clock likely contributes to Intel's single-thread wins.

Cache layouts are distinct. The AMD part uses 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 4 MB L3 total. The Intel part lists 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Intel part has more L3 cache, but the AMD part's larger per-core L2 and per-core L1 structure supports its threading advantage.

Memory support shows another split. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core 5 320 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. PCIe lanes differ as well: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the AMD part uses Radeon 840M, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). Power targets are not identical: the AMD part has a 28 W TDP, the Intel part a 15 W TDP.

The Intel Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 dominates multi-core tests. It leads by 82.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (11333 versus 6197) and by 60% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (1686 versus 1054).

Q: Which processor wins single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 wins all recorded single-thread benchmarks. It leads by 5.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1926 versus 1816), 5.8% in Cinebench R15 single-core (276 versus 260), and 7.7% in PassMark single-thread (4045 versus 3734).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both have 6 cores, but the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 has 12 threads while the Intel Core 5 320 has 6 threads. The AMD part's extra threads explain its large advantage in multithreaded tests.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 320 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has a 4.60 GHz boost clock, slightly higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435's 4.50 GHz boost clock. The Intel part's base clock is lower at 1.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Q: How do the overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 has an average benchmark score of 28128, placing it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 320 has an average of 18023, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 | Intel Core 5 320 |

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

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Not specified |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Wildcat Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 cache | 4 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes (CPU) | Gen 4, 14 lanes | Gen 4, 6 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 840M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $340 |

The two parts share several fields: both have 6 cores, support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, are mobile parts, are active in production, have locked multipliers, and are not unlocked for overclocking.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 wins in all heavily threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core and R15 multi-core show the largest gaps, and PassMark multithread confirms the trend with a 23% lead (19000 versus 15450). Integer math is the most extreme case, with AMD ahead by 88.8%. Data compression (51.5% lead), random string sorting (38% lead), and extended instructions (22.1% lead) all favor AMD. The data encryption win is marginal at 1.1%, but it still goes to AMD. These results point to a processor that excels in rendering, compilation, compression, and any workload that scales with thread count and memory bandwidth.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in single-thread latency-sensitive tests. It takes all three single-core Cinebench and PassMark tests, plus PassMark physics and PassMark find prime numbers. The find prime numbers margin is the largest at 47.3% (110 versus 58), and physics shows a 12% lead (1221 versus 1075). Floating point math is close but also goes to Intel, 42440 versus 40627. The Intel part's higher boost clock (4.60 GHz) and lower TDP (15 W) suggest an efficiency-focused design that prioritizes burst performance over sustained multi-thread throughput.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload type. For multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, and integer-heavy computation, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 is the stronger processor. Its 12 threads, dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and 28 W TDP enable substantially higher throughput, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score 82.9% higher than the Intel part. The average benchmark score of 28128, which places it in the 80th percentile, exceeds the Intel part's 18023 average by a wide margin.

For single-thread responsiveness, physics simulation, and prime-number calculation, the Intel Core 5 320 delivers higher peak performance. Its 4.60 GHz boost clock and 15 W TDP produce consistent wins in every recorded single-thread test, with margins from 5.7% to 7.7% depending on the benchmark. The find prime numbers workload shows a particularly strong 47.3% lead, and PassMark physics favors Intel by 12%.

The AMD part sits near the Intel Core i5-13490F and Intel Core i5-14500T in overall performance, while the Intel Core 5 320 sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT. That positioning confirms the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 as the higher-performing part in general-purpose and multi-threaded computing. The Intel Core 5 320, despite its lower average score, retains a distinct edge in single-thread and physics workloads, making it the better choice for applications that depend on per-core speed and low power draw.