AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 vs Intel Core i5-11320H Comparison

The benchmark data places the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 and Intel Core i5-11320H in the same performance tier, with both CPUs holding a 51st percentile ranking among all processors. The Intel part carries a slight edge in average benchmark score at 2888 compared to the AMD’s 2921, but the head-to-head results tell a different story. Across six Cinebench tests, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 wins every single round, with margins that are consistent and substantial. The AMD chip is not just faster; it is uniformly faster in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, a rare sweep in direct comparisons. The Intel Core i5-11320H, despite its higher boost clock and newer mobile pedigree, cannot close the gap in any rendering test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 dominates the Cinebench suite, with the smallest win margin being a 10% advantage in Cinebench R15 single-core. The largest delta appears in both Cinebench R20 multi-core and Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the AMD chip leads by 10.3%. In practical terms, the AMD scores 4241 versus 3846 in R20 multi-core, and 10099 versus 9158 in R23 multi-core. These are not marginal victories; a 10% performance gap in rendering workloads is significant enough to affect render times and productivity workflows.

The single-core results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 posts 1425 points against the Intel Core i5-11320H’s 1293, a 10.2% lead. The R20 single-core test shows 598 versus 543, a 10.1% edge. Even in the older R15 tests, the AMD chip wins by exactly 10% in single-core (143 vs 130) and 10.2% in multi-core (1017 vs 923). The consistency of these deltas—all clustering between 10% and 10.3%—suggests the AMD architecture delivers a uniform performance advantage across different Cinebench versions, rather than excelling only in specific workload types.

Notably, the Intel Core i5-11320H holds zero wins in this head-to-head comparison. The benchmark data shows a clean sweep for AMD, with all six tests going to the Ryzen Embedded part. This is particularly striking given that the Intel chip has a higher base clock (2.50 GHz vs 2.30 GHz) and a significantly higher boost clock (4.50 GHz vs 3.80 GHz). The clock speed advantage does not translate into benchmark wins, indicating that the AMD Zen 3+ architecture extracts more performance per clock cycle in these rendering workloads. The Intel part does have a separate Geekbench result not present in the head-to-head array—5620 multi-core and 1592 single-core—but those scores are not compared directly against the AMD chip in the provided data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 is built on TSMC’s 6 nm process node, while the Intel Core i5-11320H uses Intel’s 10 nm process. This manufacturing gap is reflected in the die size: the Intel chip measures 146.1 mm², whereas the AMD processor’s die size is not listed in the data. The smaller process node typically allows for better power efficiency, which is relevant given the AMD chip’s 15W TDP compared to the Intel part’s 28W TDP.

The core architectures are also distinct. AMD uses its Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt, while Intel employs Tiger Lake-H. Both chips feature 4 cores and 8 threads, so the thread count is identical, but the cache hierarchies differ. The AMD chip has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, while the Intel chip offers 80 KB of L1 per core and a substantially larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core. Both share 8 MB of L3 cache, so the total cache capacity is similar, but the distribution differs—Intel’s larger L2 cache could theoretically benefit certain workloads, though the benchmark results do not reflect this advantage.

Memory support is another major divergence. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a peak bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-11320H is limited to DDR4 memory, also dual-channel, but with a lower peak bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. This makes the AMD processor more suitable for error-sensitive embedded or server applications, whereas the Intel chip is positioned for mobile consumer devices. Both processors support PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, so expansion capabilities are identical.

The integrated graphics situation also differs. The Intel Core i5-11320H includes Iris XE 96EU graphics, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 has no integrated graphics listed in the data. This is a significant feature gap for systems that require a GPU output without a discrete card. The Intel chip’s launch MSRP was $309, though no pricing information exists for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-11320H has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 boosts to only 3.80 GHz. Despite this Intel advantage, the AMD chip wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 supports DDR5 memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core i5-11320H supports DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel configurations, but only the AMD chip supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 has a TDP of 15W, while the Intel Core i5-11320H has a TDP of 28W. The AMD chip consumes less power per the specification, which may be advantageous in thermally constrained systems.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-11320H has integrated graphics, specifically Iris XE 96EU. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 does not list any integrated graphics in the data.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD chip leads by 10.3% in both Cinebench R20 and R23 multi-core tests. In R20, the AMD scores 4241 versus 3846; in R23, the AMD scores 10099 versus 9158.

Q: What are the market segments for these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 is classified as a Desktop segment processor, while the Intel Core i5-11320H is classified as Mobile. Both are currently in active production.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every major specification, making them distinct choices for different system types. The most obvious differences are in clock speeds: the Intel chip has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the AMD chip runs at 2.30 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. The TDP also separates them, with the AMD at 15W and the Intel at 28W. The process node differs as well—TSMC’s 6 nm for AMD versus Intel’s 10 nm—and the foundry is different, with AMD using TSMC and Intel using its own fabs.

Memory support is a key differentiator. The AMD chip uses DDR5 with a 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel chip uses DDR4 with a 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory support is exclusive to the AMD processor. The cache layout also differs: the AMD chip has 64 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core, while the Intel chip has 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core. Both have 8 MB of shared L3 cache, so that matches.

The socket types are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP7, while Intel uses BGA 1449. The integrated graphics situation differs, with the Intel chip featuring Iris XE 96EU and the AMD chip having none listed. The market segments also differ—AMD targets Desktop, while Intel targets Mobile. The release dates are different as well, with the AMD chip launching later. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $309, while no MSRP is listed for the AMD part. Finally, the part numbers differ: AMD uses 100-000000557, and Intel uses SRKSK.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C14 wins on raw performance in every benchmark category measured. All six Cinebench tests—R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core—go to the AMD chip, with margins between 10% and 10.3%. This makes the AMD processor the clear choice for rendering workloads, video encoding, or any CPU-bound task that relies on Cinebench-style performance. The AMD chip also wins on power efficiency, with a 15W TDP versus the Intel chip’s 28W TDP, and on memory bandwidth, with DDR5 support offering 76.8 GB/s versus DDR4’s 51.2 GB/s. For systems requiring ECC memory, the AMD chip is the only option of the two.

The Intel Core i5-11320H wins on clock speed, with a 4.50 GHz boost clock that far exceeds the AMD chip’s 3.80 GHz. This may benefit lightly threaded workloads that are sensitive to raw frequency, even though the Cinebench single-core tests show the AMD chip still winning by 10%. The Intel chip also wins on integrated graphics, featuring Iris XE 96EU, which is essential for systems without a discrete GPU. The Intel chip’s larger L2 cache—1.25 MB per core versus 512 KB per core—could theoretically help in certain cache-sensitive workloads, though the benchmark data does not show this advantage manifesting in Cinebench. For mobile applications where the processor is soldered to a board, the Intel chip’s BGA 1449 socket and Mobile market segment make it the intended choice, while the AMD chip’s Desktop classification and Socket FP7 target a different system design.