AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data gives the AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G a decisive overall win count of 10 out of 11 benchmark comparisons. The largest single margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 71,251 against the Intel Core 5 320's 32,323, a gap of 120.4%. This is the standout numerical difference in the entire comparison, indicating a fundamental throughput advantage in basic arithmetic operations.

Data compression shows the second-largest delta, with AMD at 292,735 versus Intel at 148,779, a 96.8% advantage. This workload is heavily dependent on memory bandwidth and multi-threaded execution, both areas where the AMD processor holds a structural lead. Random string sorting follows closely at 72.4% ahead (31,106 vs. 18,038), another pattern consistent with faster memory access and higher thread count.

The extended instructions test delivers a 55.7% win for AMD (20,648 vs. 13,262), and the multithreaded PassMark suite shows a 52% advantage (23,487 vs. 15,450). The AMD chip also wins data encryption by 23.7% (13,585 vs. 10,984), physics by 8.8% (1,329 vs. 1,221), and floating-point math by 7.7% (45,711 vs. 42,440).

The single-thread comparison is effectively a tie. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G scores 4,060 versus Intel's 4,045, a delta of just 0.4%. Both processors deliver nearly identical per-core performance in this metric, which means the overall average benchmark gap of roughly 156% (46,187 vs. 18,023) is driven almost entirely by multi-threaded and memory-sensitive workloads rather than raw single-core capability.

The only benchmark where Intel wins is the find prime numbers test, scoring 110 versus AMD's 90, a delta of -18.2% from AMD's perspective. This is a narrow but real victory for Intel in a workload that often favors lower-latency integer loops. It does not offset the scale of AMD's wins elsewhere, but it prevents a clean sweep.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear split decision based on workload type. For any application that scales with thread count, memory bandwidth, or data compression, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G is the stronger processor by a substantial margin. Its wins in multithreaded PassMark, integer math, and data compression all exceed 50%, and its average benchmark score of 46,187 places it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database. That percentile ranking puts it alongside much higher-tier parts like the Intel Core i9-13900HX (average score 46,098, delta 0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46,030, delta 0.3%), meaning the 440G sits at the top of the mainstream desktop performance curve.

The Intel Core 5 320, by contrast, records an average benchmark score of 18,023, which lands it in the 72nd percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17,994, delta 0.2%) and the Intel Core 5 120U (17,898, delta 0.7%), placing it in the range of older or lower-power processors. Its single-thread score is nearly identical to AMD's, but its lack of multithreading and its single-channel memory bus hold back everything else.

The Intel part does win the prime number test, and its single-thread score is only 0.4% behind, so users whose workloads are strictly single-threaded and integer-bound will see nearly identical performance from either chip. However, the recorded data shows no other workload where Intel pulls ahead. For mobile systems where the Intel part's 15 W TDP and compact BGA package are relevant, the Core 5 320 offers a specific power envelope advantage, but the benchmark results do not support choosing it for raw compute throughput.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G is the choice for desktop users running multithreaded productivity, compression, encryption, or scientific workloads. The Intel Core 5 320 is the choice only when the mobile form factor, lower power draw, and single-channel simplicity are the primary constraints, and even then the performance gap in most tests remains large.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G wins 10 of the 11 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 5 320 wins only the find prime numbers test.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G scores 4,060 in PassMark single-thread, while the Intel Core 5 320 scores 4,045, a delta of 0.4%. This is effectively a tie.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G scores 71,251 versus the Intel Core 5 320's 32,323, a 120.4% advantage for AMD.

Q: Where does the Intel Core 5 320 outperform the AMD chip?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 wins the find prime numbers test with a score of 110 against AMD's 90, representing an 18.2% advantage for Intel in that specific workload.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G has an average benchmark score of 46,187, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 320 averages 18,023, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Q: Are their nearest rivals similar in performance?

A: The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HX (average 46,098, delta 0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46,030, delta 0.3%). The Intel part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17,994, delta 0.2%) and the Intel Core 5 120U (17,898, delta 0.7%).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several fundamental specification fields. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G uses an AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel Core 5 320 uses an Intel BGA 1516 package. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads; the Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no Hyper-Threading support.

Base clock rates differ: AMD runs at 2.00 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. The thermal design power is 65 W for AMD and 15 W for Intel, a 50 W difference that reflects their different market segments (desktop versus mobile).

Memory support also diverges. The AMD chip supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe lane counts differ as well: AMD provides Gen 4 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics are different: AMD uses the Radeon 840M, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel processor is locked. Release dates also differ, with AMD listed as 2026-02-28 and Intel as 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $340; the AMD part has no recorded MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a codename of Gorgon Point and a generation label of "Ryzen AI 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c)". Its die size is 195 mm². The Intel Core 5 320 uses a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry, with a codename of Wildcat Lake and a generation label of "Core 5 (Wildcat Lake)"; no die size is recorded for Intel.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. The Intel chip has 192 KB of total L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. This gives AMD a larger per-core L2 allocation and a larger total L3 pool, while Intel's L1 is reported as a single aggregate figure rather than per-core.

The core architecture itself is a key divergence. AMD uses a hybrid arrangement of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, which allows higher thread density within the same package. Intel uses Wildcat Lake cores, which appear to be designed for lower power draw given the 15 W TDP. The process node difference (4 nm TSMC vs. 3 nm Intel) is notable, but the benchmark data suggests the AMD design extracts more throughput from its larger power envelope and dual-channel memory path.

The Intel part's integrated graphics uses Xe3 architecture with 2 Xe cores, while AMD's Radeon 840M is a separate GPU block. Neither processor's iGPU is benchmarked in the provided head-to-head data, so any comparison of graphics performance would go beyond the recorded facts. The memory bandwidth difference (89.6 GB/s vs. 59.7 GB/s) is the most direct architectural consequence visible in the benchmark results, explaining the large gaps in data compression and random string sorting.