Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core i5-14450HX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into clearly different roles. The Intel Core i5-14450HX wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, establishing itself as the dominant multi-threaded workhorse. The Intel Core 5 320 wins only 3 tests, but those wins reveal a distinct niche: single-thread responsiveness and prime-number throughput.

The Core 5 320's victories come in PassMark's find_prime_numbers test (110 vs 98, a 12.2% advantage) and both PassMark single-thread measurements (4045 vs 3643, an 11% advantage). These results indicate that for tasks relying on lightweight, latency-sensitive single-thread execution, the Wildcat Lake part holds an edge despite its lower overall positioning.

The Core i5-14450HX, by contrast, dominates every Cinebench multi-core test and most PassMark workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20108 versus 6197 represents a 69.2% margin, the largest gap in the entire dataset. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration with a 55 TDP clearly prioritizes sustained throughput over efficiency.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this separation. The Core i5-14450HX posts an average of 32040, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 320 averages 18023, sitting in the 72nd percentile. The 44% gap in average scores (32040 vs 18023) aligns with the Core i5-14450HX's nearest rivals: the Intel Core i7-13705H (32076, -0.1%), Intel Core i5-14400 (32115, -0.2%), and Intel Core i7-12800H (32121, -0.3%). The Core 5 320's closest competitors include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17994, +0.2%) and Intel Core 5 120U (17898, +0.7%), showing it competes in a lower performance tier.

For workloads such as data compression, integer math, and multi-thread rendering, the Core i5-14450HX is the clear choice. For single-thread responsiveness and prime-number calculations, the Core 5 320 shows a measurable advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4045 versus 3643 for the Intel Core i5-14450HX, an 11% advantage. However, the Core i5-14450HX wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test (2838 vs 1926, a 32.1% margin) and the Cinebench R15 single-core test (285 vs 276, a 3.2% margin).

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

A: The Core i5-14450HX leads substantially in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 20108 versus 6197, a 69.2% difference. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the gap is 35.3% (8445 vs 5462). The PassMark multithread test shows a 34.8% gap (23680 vs 15450).

Q: Which CPU has better data compression performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14450HX delivers 278538 in PassMark data compression, compared to 148779 for the Core 5 320, a 46.6% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in CPU percentile ranking?

A: The Core i5-14450HX ranks in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 320 ranks in the 72nd percentile.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core i5-14450HX supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 320 does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i5-14450HX boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Core 5 320 boosts to 4.60 GHz. The Core 5 320 has a lower base clock at 1.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the most dramatic separation between these two processors. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i5-14450HX scores 20108 against the Core 5 320's 6197, a 69.2% deficit for the latter. This is the single largest delta in the dataset. The R20 multi-core test shows a 35.3% gap (8445 vs 5462), and the R15 multi-core test shows a 48% gap (2026 vs 1054).

Single-core Cinebench results are more nuanced. The Core i5-14450HX wins R23 single-core by 32.1% (2838 vs 1926) and R20 single-core by 35.3% (1191 vs 771), but the R15 single-core margin shrinks to just 3.2% (285 vs 276). The Core 5 320's PassMark single-thread win of 11% (4045 vs 3643) stands in contrast to these Cinebench results, suggesting the two processors excel under different single-thread measurement methodologies.

PassMark integer math heavily favors the Core i5-14450HX: 78330 versus 32323, a 58.7% difference. Floating-point math shows a 26.9% gap (58037 vs 42440). Data compression favors the Core i5-14450HX by 46.6% (278538 vs 148779), while data encryption shows a 29.5% gap (15574 vs 10984). Extended instructions deliver a 22.9% advantage for the Core i5-14450HX (17207 vs 13262).

The Core 5 320's wins are concentrated in specific workloads. Its find_prime_numbers score of 110 beats the Core i5-14450HX's 98 by 12.2%. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4045 beats 3643 by 11%, a result that repeats across both single_thread and singlethread test entries. The physics test favors the Core i5-14450HX by 17.2% (1475 vs 1221), and random string sorting shows a 39% gap (29565 vs 18038).

The overall win count stands at 14 for the Core i5-14450HX and 3 for the Core 5 320. The average benchmark score difference is 32040 versus 18023, a 44% gap that places the two processors in different performance classes despite both being mobile parts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ substantially across core configuration, memory support, and platform features. The Core i5-14450HX uses 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 5 320 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core i5-14450HX has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz; the Core 5 320 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Thermal design power differs by a wide margin: 55 watts for the Core i5-14450HX versus 15 watts for the Core 5 320. This explains the performance gap, as the Core i5-14450HX has substantially more thermal headroom for sustained loads.

Memory support diverges significantly. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i5-14450HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, and no bandwidth figure is recorded. The Core i5-14450HX also supports ECC memory, which the Core 5 320 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs: the Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core i5-14450HX provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core i5-14450HX uses UHD Graphics 710.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 320 and Intel BGA 1964 for the Core i5-14450HX. The Core i5-14450HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 320 does not. The Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340; the Core i5-14450HX has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Core i5-14450HX was released on 2024-01-07, while the Core 5 320 was released on 2026-04-15. Both are currently active production parts.

Architecture Differences

The Core 5 320 is built on Wildcat Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. The Core i5-14450HX uses Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node and a die size of 257 mm². The process node difference is notable: 3 nm versus 10 nm, which contributes to the Core 5 320's lower power envelope of 15 watts.

Cache hierarchies diverge structurally. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5-14450HX has 80 KB per core of L1, 2 MB per core of L2, and 20 MB of shared L3. The per-core cache design of the Core i5-14450HX reflects its larger core count, while the shared L3 advantage (20 MB vs 6 MB) supports its multi-threaded workload dominance.

The Core 5 320 belongs to the Core 5 series under the Wildcat Lake generation, while the Core i5-14450HX belongs to the Core 14th Gen series under the Raptor Lake-HX Refresh generation. The Core i5-14450HX has a part number of SRMXK; the Core 5 320 uses SAE3H.

Neither processor records transistor counts or die size for the Core 5 320. The Core i5-14450HX has a documented die size of 257 mm², while the Core 5 320's die size is not recorded.

The Core i5-14450HX's Raptor Lake design provides 16 threads from 10 cores, indicating hybrid or hyper-threaded core arrangements. The Core 5 320 provides 6 threads from 6 cores, a straightforward 6-core configuration with no hyper-threading. This architectural difference explains the Core i5-14450HX's substantial lead in multi-threaded benchmarks despite its older process node.

The memory controller designs differ as well: single-channel for the Core 5 320 versus dual-channel for the Core i5-14450HX. The Core 5 320's memory bandwidth is recorded at 59.7 GB/s, while the Core i5-14450HX has no recorded bandwidth figure. The Core 5 320's support for LPDDR5X suggests a focus on power-efficient mobile designs, while the Core i5-14450HX's DDR4 and DDR5 support with ECC indicates a broader platform compatibility range.

The PCIe generation gap (Gen 4 for the Core 5 320, Gen 5 for the Core i5-14450HX) and lane count difference (6 vs 16) further differentiate their platform positioning. The Core 5 320's integrated graphics with 2 Xe cores represents a newer graphics architecture, while the Core i5-14450HX uses the older UHD Graphics 710.