AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits the two processors into distinct performance identities. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 wins six of the eleven recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 315 wins five. The margins, however, are not symmetrical. AMD’s victories are frequently decisive, while Intel’s are narrower but still significant in specific workloads.

The largest single gap appears in PassMark integer math. The AMD part scores 60,879 against Intel’s 31,690, a delta of 92.1 percent in AMD’s favor. This is the dominant performance advantage in the entire comparison. Data compression tells a similar story: AMD scores 232,803 versus Intel’s 146,143, a 59.3 percent lead. Random string sorting also favors AMD heavily, with scores of 24,936 and 17,551 respectively, a 42.1 percent difference. Extended instructions show a 27.2 percent AMD advantage, with scores of 16,724 against 13,143. The multithread score, which aggregates general parallel throughput, gives AMD a 25 percent lead: 19,091 versus 15,272.

The Intel Core 5 315 counters in several areas. The largest Intel win is in the prime number search test, where Intel scores 112 against AMD’s 57. That is a 49.1 percent swing in Intel’s favor. Physics simulation also goes to Intel, 1,163 versus 995, a 14.4 percent gap. Floating-point math shows a smaller Intel edge: 42,441 versus 41,114, a 3.1 percent difference. Single-thread performance, measured twice under slightly different test names, gives Intel 4,021 against AMD’s 3,757, a 6.6 percent lead. Data encryption is nearly a tie, with AMD at 11,267 and Intel at 11,119, a 1.3 percent difference.

The overall average benchmark scores in the database reflect this split. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 posts an average benchmark score of 37,762 and sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 315 has an average score of 18,188 and sits at the 72nd percentile. That large gap in average score is driven by AMD’s dominance in the heavily weighted integer and compression tests. The Intel part’s nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18,189 and the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18,180, both within 0.1 percent. The AMD part’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 at 37,804 and the Intel Core 5 211E at 37,829, with deltas of -0.1 and -0.2 percent respectively. The Intel Core i5-13600K sits 0.2 percent behind the AMD part, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 sits 0.4 percent behind.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload type. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is the stronger processor for parallel throughput, integer-heavy computation, data compression, sorting tasks, and extended instruction workloads. Its multithread score of 19,091 exceeds Intel’s 15,272 by 25 percent, and its integer math score is nearly double Intel’s. Any workload that relies heavily on integer operations or data manipulation will favor the AMD part.

The Intel Core 5 315 wins in single-thread performance, prime number calculations, physics simulation, and floating-point math. The 6.6 percent single-thread lead and the 49.1 percent prime number advantage indicate a different microarchitectural strength, likely aligned with branch-heavy or scalar workloads. The floating-point edge is modest, only 3.1 percent, so it is not a decisive factor in most real-world floating-point tasks.

For a user selecting between these two, the decision hinges on whether the target applications are multi-threaded integer workloads or single-threaded scalar workloads. The database shows AMD leading in six categories and Intel in five, but the magnitude of AMD’s wins in integer math and compression outweighs Intel’s narrower victories. The average benchmark score, which is a composite of all tests, strongly favors the AMD part at 37,762 versus 18,188. That composite places the AMD part at the 86th percentile, well above Intel’s 72nd percentile. The data supports the AMD part as the higher overall performer, with the Intel part as the choice only for specific single-thread-sensitive or physics-heavy tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has an average benchmark score of 37,762, while the Intel Core 5 315 has an average score of 18,188.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two in any single test?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 60,879 and the Intel part scores 31,690, a 92.1 percent difference in AMD’s favor.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 315 win any test by a large margin?

A: Yes, in the PassMark find prime numbers test, the Intel part scores 112 against AMD’s 57, a 49.1 percent lead for Intel.

Q: How do the single-thread scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 scores 4,021 in single-thread tests, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 3,757. That is a 6.6 percent advantage for Intel.

Q: Which processor has the better multithread score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 19,091 in the PassMark multithread test, compared to the Intel Core 5 315’s 15,272, a 25 percent difference.

Q: How do the two processors rank against all CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 5 315 is at the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clock speeds differ: 2.00 GHz for AMD versus 1.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are closer, with AMD at 4.50 GHz and Intel at 4.40 GHz. Thermal design power differs substantially: the AMD part is rated at 28 watts, the Intel part at 15 watts.

Memory configuration is another major difference. The AMD part supports dual-channel memory and has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports single-channel memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part but not on the Intel part. PCIe lane counts also differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 840M, while Intel uses the Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The socket types are different: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8 and Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $340. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed. Both processors are marked as active in production and both are for the mobile market segment. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectures and process nodes. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 uses the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Gorgon Point, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c). It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 315 uses the codename Wildcat Lake, part of the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation, and is fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel.

Cache structures differ significantly. The AMD part has an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 1 MB per core, and an L3 cache of 4 MB. The Intel part has an L1 cache of 192 KB total, an L2 cache of 2.5 MB total, and an L3 cache of 6 MB shared. The Intel part has a larger total L3 cache but a smaller amount of L2 per core. The AMD part’s per-core L2 is 1 MB per core across 6 cores, giving 6 MB total L2, which is higher than Intel’s 2.5 MB total L2.

Threading support is an architectural difference: AMD supports simultaneous multithreading with 12 threads across 6 cores, while Intel only supports 6 threads across 6 cores. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. The memory controller differs as well, with AMD supporting dual-channel memory and Intel supporting single-channel memory. The PCIe implementation also differs, with AMD offering 14 lanes and Intel offering 6 lanes, both Gen 4.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, integer math, multithread performance, and random string sorting. These are workloads that benefit from parallel execution and high throughput per core. The 92.1 percent lead in integer math makes the AMD part well suited for general productivity applications, database operations, and any software that compresses or sorts large datasets. The 59.3 percent lead in data compression and the 42.1 percent lead in random string sorting reinforce that profile. The 25 percent multithread advantage indicates better scaling across all cores, which is expected given that it has 12 threads versus Intel’s 6.

The Intel Core 5 315 wins in prime number calculations, floating-point math, physics simulation, and single-thread performance. The 49.1 percent lead in prime number searching suggests a strong branch predictor or faster per-clock execution on scalar loops. The 14.4 percent lead in physics simulation points to better performance in certain scientific or simulation workloads. The 6.6 percent single-thread lead makes the Intel part preferable for lightly threaded applications where a single core is the bottleneck. The floating-point lead is small at 3.1 percent, so it is not a strong differentiator.

The data indicates that the AMD part is the better choice for multi-threaded, integer-heavy, and data-intensive tasks, while the Intel part is better for single-threaded scalar tasks and physics calculations. The Intel part’s lower TDP of 15 watts versus AMD’s 28 watts also suggests it may fit into more power-constrained designs, though the database does not record power efficiency metrics. The AMD part’s higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s and dual-channel support further favor it for memory-heavy workloads. The Intel part’s larger shared L3 cache of 6 MB versus AMD’s 4 MB may help in some cache-sensitive single-threaded tasks, which aligns with its single-thread wins.