AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS and Intel Core 5 320 are both six-core mobile processors, but they target different priorities. The AMD part is a 45 W embedded chip with simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part is a 15 W mobile chip with a higher single-thread clock and a newer process node. Benchmark data for the AMD side is absent, so the comparison relies entirely on the Intel Core 5 320’s recorded scores, its position among rivals, and the architectural specifications listed for both.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 320 is the only processor in this comparison with recorded benchmark results. Its average benchmark score is 18023, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. That puts it just 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core 5 120U, while trailing the Intel Core i5-1334U by 0.7%. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS has no benchmark entries and no average score, so no direct performance comparison is possible from the recorded data.

For builders who need an embedded processor with ECC memory support, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS is the clear choice, as the Intel Core 5 320 does not support ECC. For those who need a low-power mobile chip with a smaller process node and a higher single-core boost clock, the Intel Core 5 320 is the better fit. The AMD chip offers 12 threads versus 6, but the Intel chip has a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus 5.00 GHz for the AMD part, which is the opposite of what one might expect from the base clock numbers. The AMD part has a 4.30 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost, while the Intel part has a 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost.

The Intel Core 5 320 is the only one with a launch MSRP of $340. The database shows no such figure for the AMD chip.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS uses Zen 4 architecture on the Hawk Point codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 320 uses Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel. No transistor count or die size is listed for the Intel part.

The AMD chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, enabled by SMT. The Intel chip has 6 cores and 6 threads, no SMT. Cache layouts differ substantially. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel lists 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3.

Memory support diverges sharply. The AMD chip supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory. The Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

PCIe lanes also differ. The AMD part provides Gen 4, 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 4, 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 760M, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe).

The AMD chip is in the Ryzen Embedded 8000 series, while the Intel chip is in the Core 5 series with the Wildcat Lake generation. Release dates differ by about two years: the AMD chip was released on 2024-04-01, the Intel chip on 2026-04-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS has no benchmark records in the database, the head-to-head comparison can only describe the Intel Core 5 320’s absolute scores and its standing among its nearest rivals.

The Intel Core 5 320 delivers a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1054 and a single-core score of 276. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5462 multicore and 771 single-core. Cinebench R23 results show 6197 multicore and 1926 single-core.

PassMark results cover several workloads. The chip scores 148779 in data compression, 10984 in data encryption, 13262 in extended instructions, 110 in find prime numbers, 42440 in floating point math, 32323 in integer math, 15450 in multithread, 1221 in physics, 18038 in random string sorting, and 4045 in single thread.

The average benchmark score of 18023 places this chip at the 72nd percentile. Its nearest rivals show very close scores. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 scores 17994, which is 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 5 320. The Intel Core 5 120U scores 17898, 0.7% lower. The Intel Core i5-1334U scores 18154, which is 0.7% higher than the Intel Core 5 320. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT scores 17891, 0.7% lower.

The data indicates that the Intel Core 5 320 sits in a tight performance cluster with these four rivals. Its percentile rank of 72 means it outperforms roughly three-quarters of all CPUs in the database, but its closest competition is within a single percentage point.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS support ECC memory?

A: Yes. The AMD chip lists ECC memory as true, while the Intel Core 5 320 lists ECC memory as false.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS has 12 threads from 6 cores. The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 threads from 6 cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD chip has a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which chip has a smaller process node?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 is built on a 3 nm process, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS is built on a 4 nm process.

Q: What is the Intel Core 5 320’s launch MSRP?

A: The launch MSRP is $340.

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 320 compare to the AMD Ryzen 5 1600?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has an average score of 18023, which is 0.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 1600’s 17994.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 320 has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS wins on multi-threaded capability. It has 12 threads versus 6, double the L3 cache (16 MB shared versus 6 MB shared), and a higher base clock (4.30 GHz versus 1.50 GHz). Its dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth is nearly 50% higher than the Intel chip’s 59.7 GB/s. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which is essential for embedded and reliability-focused workloads. Its 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes provide more expansion headroom than the Intel chip’s 6 lanes.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins on power efficiency and process technology. It has a 15 W TDP versus 45 W for the AMD chip, and it is built on a 3 nm process versus 4 nm. Its boost clock of 4.60 GHz is lower than the AMD chip’s 5.00 GHz, but the Intel chip’s single-core Cinebench R23 score of 1926 suggests strong single-thread performance for a 15 W part. The Intel chip also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, which the AMD chip does not list. Its launch MSRP is $340.

For embedded applications requiring ECC, high memory bandwidth, and many threads, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS is the appropriate choice. For thin-and-light mobile designs with strict power budgets and a preference for the smaller process node, the Intel Core 5 320 fits better. The AMD chip’s 45 W TDP indicates it needs more cooling, while the Intel chip’s 15 W TDP suits fanless or low-profile cooling solutions.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded 8645HS | Intel Core 5 320 |

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

| Series | 8000 series | (not listed) |

| Cores | 6 | 6 |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base clock | 4.30 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | (not listed) |

| Die size | 178 mm² | (not listed) |

| L1 cache | 64 KB per core | 192 KB total |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB total |

| L3 cache | 16 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

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

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 lanes | Gen 4, 6 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 760M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Release date | 2024-04-01 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | (not listed) | $340 |

| Part number | unknown | SAE3H |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | No |

| Production status | Active | Active |

| Market segment | Mobile | Mobile |

The specification table shows the fundamental differences. The AMD chip trades power for capability: higher TDP, more threads, larger caches, wider memory bus, and ECC support. The Intel chip trades features for efficiency: lower TDP, smaller process node, and LPDDR5X support. The AMD chip has a much higher boost clock, but the Intel chip has a much lower base clock, suggesting different power management strategies. The Intel chip’s single-channel memory is a significant limitation for memory-intensive workloads, while the AMD chip’s 89.6 GB/s bandwidth serves multi-threaded tasks better. The lack of benchmark data for the AMD chip means the performance gap cannot be quantified, only inferred from the architectural specifications and the Intel chip’s recorded scores.