AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a complete sweep: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks against the Intel Core 5 320. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX sits at the 97th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 320 lands at the 72nd percentile. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 101041, compared to 18023 for the Intel part, a difference of roughly 5.6 times. The nearest rival data reinforces this separation: the Threadripper PRO 9955WX trades within 2.6% of the AMD EPYC 4585PX and 2.2% of the AMD EPYC 8324P, while the Core 5 320 sits within 0.7% of the Intel Core i5-1334U and 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT. The AMD processor is a workstation or server-class part aimed at sustained heavy multi-threaded loads. The Intel Core 5 320 is a mobile processor, and the benchmark results show it is not in the same performance class despite having a newer process node.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Shimada Peak and is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The chip carries 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The transistor count is 16,630 million across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². Memory support is DDR5 through an eight-channel bus, yielding 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU. There is no integrated graphics. The package is AMD Socket sTR5, and the multiplier is unlocked. The launch MSRP is $1649.

The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process at Intel. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no Hyper-Threading. The base clock is 1.50 GHz and the boost clock is 4.60 GHz. Cache amounts are 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support covers DDR5 and LPDDR5X through a single-channel bus, giving 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC memory is not supported. PCIe is Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics is Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The socket is Intel BGA 1516, and the multiplier is locked. The launch MSRP is $340. The process node advantage (3 nm vs 4 nm) does not translate into a performance advantage in the recorded data. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX has more than double the cores, 32 threads versus 6, and a much larger L3 cache at 64 MB versus 6 MB. The memory bandwidth difference is also substantial: 409.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 59494 against 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, a delta of 860%. That is the most extreme margin in the entire comparison. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 24987 versus 5462, a 357.5% advantage, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5996 versus 1054, a 468.9% advantage. The single-core Cinebench results are also lopsided: R23 single-core is 8399 versus 1926, a 336.1% delta, and R20 single-core is 3527 versus 771, also 357.5%. Only in PassMark single-thread does the gap narrow meaningfully: 4530 versus 4045, a 12% delta. That is the smallest margin in the dataset, showing that the Intel part can approach the AMD part in lightly threaded integer work, but it still loses.

In the PassMark suite, the AMD part dominates every category. Integer math: 236120 versus 32323, a 630.5% delta. Data compression: 920954 versus 148779, a 519% delta. Extended instructions: 76363 versus 13262, a 475.8% delta. Random string sorting: 99813 versus 18038, a 453.3% delta. Multi-thread: 67035 versus 15450, a 333.9% delta. Data encryption: 44389 versus 10984, a 304.1% delta. Floating point math: 156215 versus 42440, a 268.1% delta. Physics: 4156 versus 1221, a 240.4% delta. Find prime numbers: 337 versus 110, a 206.4% delta. Every test follows the same pattern: the Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins, often by multiple times. The smallest win in the PassMark suite is the single-thread test at 12%, which is consistent with the Cinebench single-core results showing a much larger gap, suggesting the Intel part's single-core performance is competitive only in specific workloads.

The delta percentages across the board indicate that the AMD part is not just faster, it is faster by a factor of three to nine in most tests. The multi-core tests show the largest gaps because the AMD part has 16 cores and 32 threads versus 6 cores and 6 threads. The single-core tests show smaller gaps, but the AMD part still leads by 206.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core and 336.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core. The PassMark single-thread test is the only place where the Intel part comes close, and even there it loses by 12%. The data shows a processor designed for throughput against a processor designed for efficiency in a mobile form factor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 320 supports single-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 320 does not support ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX does.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX scores 59494 versus 6197, an 860% delta.

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 320 competitive in any benchmark?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 comes closest in PassMark single-thread, scoring 4045 versus 4530 for the AMD part, a 12% delta. It still loses, but the gap is much smaller than in multi-core tests.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 320 is built on a 3 nm process at Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins in every recorded benchmark category, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of the win and the platform traits. The AMD part is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, as shown by Cinebench R23 multi-core at 59494 versus 6197, an 860% delta. It is also the choice for data-heavy workloads: data compression scores 920954 versus 148779, a 519% delta, and integer math scores 236120 versus 32323, a 630.5% delta. The eight-channel memory bus at 409.6 GB/s and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes support sustained throughput for workstation and server tasks. The 64 MB L3 cache and 16,630 million transistors on a 2x 70.6 mm² die indicate a part built for large working sets. The unlocked multiplier on the sTR5 socket also allows frequency adjustment, which the locked Intel part does not permit.

The Intel Core 5 320 has no benchmark wins, but the data still shows where it fits. Its 15 W TDP and 3 nm process point to a low-power mobile part, and the integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores provide a display output that the AMD part lacks entirely. The single-channel memory bus at 59.7 GB/s and 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes match a thin-and-light design rather than a compute platform. The PassMark single-thread result of 4045 versus 4530, a 12% delta, shows that in lightly threaded tasks the Intel part is not far behind, so for basic interactive use the gap is modest. The nearest rival data supports this positioning: the Core 5 320 sits within 0.7% of the Intel Core i5-1334U and 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, placing it in the mainstream mobile and entry desktop performance band. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX, by contrast, sits within 2.6% of the AMD EPYC 4585PX and 2.2% of the AMD EPYC 8324P, placing it in server-class territory.

The practical split is therefore not about which processor wins, because the AMD part wins all 17 tests, but about which workloads justify the platform. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX is for multi-core rendering, data compression, encryption, floating-point math, and any task that can use 32 threads. The Core 5 320 is for battery-powered mobile systems where the 15 W TDP, integrated graphics, and compact BGA package are the priorities. The 12% single-thread gap means everyday responsive use is not dramatically different, but the 860% multi-core gap means any parallel workload is orders of magnitude faster on the AMD part. The data does not show a single scenario where the Intel part outperforms the AMD part in raw compute. The choice comes down to platform requirements: the AMD part demands a desktop socket with 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and eight-channel memory, while the Intel part fits a mobile socket with 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes and single-channel memory.