AMD Ryzen 5 230 vs Intel Core 5 221E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a strikingly one-sided comparison. The Intel Core 5 221E wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the AMD Ryzen 5 230 trailing in every single workload. The margins vary considerably, from narrow single-digit gaps to dominant leads exceeding 60 percent.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the Intel part shows a consistent performance advantage across all six tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel scores 25,933 versus the AMD's 17,857, a delta of -31.1 percent from the AMD's perspective. The single-core test in R23 shows a similar story: Intel at 3,661, AMD at 2,521, again a -31.1 percent gap. The older R20 and R15 tests reinforce this pattern, with Intel winning by roughly 31 percent in both multi-core and single-core variants. This consistency across different Cinebench versions suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

The PassMark suite reveals where the Intel chip's larger core count and higher boost clock pay the biggest dividends. The most dramatic difference appears in `passmark_find_prime_numbers`, where Intel scores 173 against AMD's 66, a massive -61.8 percent delta. Prime number finding is heavily dependent on integer throughput and core count, so this result aligns with the Intel part's 14 cores versus 6. Floating-point math also shows a huge gap: Intel at 79,028, AMD at 38,993, a -50.7 percent difference. Physics calculations follow suit, with Intel scoring 2,230 versus AMD's 958, a -57 percent delta.

Integer math favors Intel by 42.9 percent (117,813 versus 67,257), while the multi-threaded PassMark test shows Intel ahead by 36.4 percent (30,510 versus 19,411). Data compression and encryption tasks show Intel winning by 32.6 percent and 30.9 percent respectively. Random string sorting has Intel ahead by 31 percent.

The narrowest margins appear in single-threaded workloads. PassMark single-thread shows Intel at 4,147 versus AMD's 3,558, a -14.2 percent delta. The extended instructions test also shows a relatively modest gap: Intel at 18,216, AMD at 15,618, a -14.3 percent difference. These smaller gaps in single-threaded and SIMD-heavy tasks suggest that the AMD's Zen 4 architecture has competitive per-core efficiency, even though it cannot match the Intel chip's overall throughput.

The aggregate data reinforces the Intel lead. The Intel Core 5 221E sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen 5 230 sits at the 78th percentile. The average benchmark score for Intel is 40,144, compared to AMD's 25,782. For context, the Intel part's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (average score 40,081, delta 0.2 percent) and the Intel Core i9-13905H (40,313, delta -0.4 percent). The AMD Ryzen 5 230, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 7730U (25,625, delta 0.6 percent) and Intel Core i7-11700K (25,812, delta -0.1 percent). This placement confirms that the two processors operate in different performance tiers entirely.

Architecture Differences

The architectures explain the benchmark results clearly. The AMD Ryzen 5 230 uses the Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the Hawk Point codename. It packs 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The thermal design power is 28 watts, targeting the mobile segment with an AMD Socket FP8. The Intel Core 5 221E, meanwhile, uses the Bartlett Lake codename on Intel's 10 nm process. It has 14 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The TDP is 65 watts, and it targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches on the Intel part, combined with more cores, contribute to its higher throughput in cache-sensitive workloads like random string sorting and data compression.

Memory support also differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 only, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses with identical peak bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. However, the Intel chip supports ECC memory, while the AMD chip does not. This could matter for certain workstation or server-like deployments where data integrity is critical.

PCIe connectivity shows a trade-off. The AMD chip offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Intel chip offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The newer PCIe standard on the Intel side provides higher per-lane bandwidth, though the AMD part has more total lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD uses a Radeon 760M, while the Intel uses UHD Graphics 730. Neither is a discrete-class solution, but they serve different market positions.

The process node difference is significant: 4 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. This explains why the AMD chip achieves its performance at a much lower 28-watt TDP, while the Intel part requires 65 watts. The die size reflects this too: AMD's die measures 178 mm², while Intel's measures 257 mm². The AMD chip has 25,000 million transistors on its die, while the Intel's transistor count is not listed in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 221E wins everywhere in the recorded benchmarks, but the magnitude of the win varies by workload type. The largest advantages appear in integer-heavy and multi-threaded tasks. Prime number finding, floating-point math, and physics simulations show the biggest deltas, ranging from 50 to 62 percent. These workloads scale with core count and raw throughput, where the Intel's 14 cores and 20 threads dominate the AMD's 6 cores and 12 threads.

The Intel chip also leads decisively in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting, with deltas around 31 to 33 percent. These tasks benefit from the larger L3 cache and higher boost clock. The boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz gives the Intel part an edge in bursty workloads that rely on single-thread speed, though the single-threaded benchmark gaps are smaller (around 14 percent) than the multi-threaded ones.

The AMD Ryzen 5 230 does not win any recorded benchmark, but its competitive single-threaded performance deserves attention. The 14.2 percent gap in PassMark single-thread and 14.3 percent gap in extended instructions are the smallest margins in the entire comparison. This suggests that for lightly threaded tasks with modest SIMD usage, the AMD chip is closer in performance than the raw core count difference might imply. The AMD's lower TDP of 28 watts also implies significantly better performance per watt, though the database does not directly measure power efficiency.

For users prioritizing raw throughput across many cores, the Intel part is the clear choice based on the data. For users who need a compact mobile processor with competitive per-core performance and much lower power draw, the AMD part offers a different trade-off. The AMD's mobile market segment and 28-watt TDP position it for laptops and portable devices, while the Intel's desktop segment and 65-watt TDP target stationary systems with less thermal constraint.

The Verdict

The data directs a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core 5 221E outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 230 across every recorded benchmark, often by wide margins. The average benchmark score of 40,144 for Intel versus 25,782 for AMD represents a 55.7 percent advantage. The percentile ranking confirms this, with Intel at 87th percentile versus AMD at 78th.

The Intel part's nearest rivals in the database are high-end desktop and mobile processors like the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and Intel Core i9-13905H, placing it in a performance class well above the AMD Ryzen 5 230. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-11700K and AMD Ryzen 7 7730U, which are older or lower-tier designs. This positioning makes the comparison clear: buyers seeking maximum performance should choose the Intel Core 5 221E based on the benchmark evidence.

However, the AMD Ryzen 5 230 serves a different purpose. Its 28-watt TDP and mobile socket (AMD Socket FP8) indicate it is designed for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency matters more than peak throughput. The Intel part, with its 65-watt TDP and desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700), requires a more substantial cooling solution and power delivery. The AMD's 4 nm process and smaller die (178 mm² versus 257 mm²) demonstrate a more advanced manufacturing technology that enables this efficiency.

For a desktop system where performance is the sole criterion, the Intel Core 5 221E wins decisively. For a mobile device where battery life and thermal limits are primary constraints, the AMD Ryzen 5 230 is the appropriate choice despite its lower benchmark scores. The Intel's launch MSRP is $232, while the AMD's launch MSRP is not listed in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 230 has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 230 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Intel scores 173 versus the AMD's 66, a delta of -61.8 percent.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 221E supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 5 230 does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E sits at the 87th percentile, while the AMD Ryzen 5 230 sits at the 78th percentile.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 230 has a TDP of 28 watts, and the Intel Core 5 221E has a TDP of 65 watts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 230 | Intel Core 5 221E |

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

| Cores | 6 | 14 |

| Threads | 12 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Bartlett Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 760M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $232 |