AMD Ryzen 5 4680U vs Intel Core i3-1125G4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a split decision that hinges heavily on the test methodology. The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U claims victory in three of the four head-to-head comparisons, but the Intel Core i3-1125G4 takes the most significant win in the most demanding workload. The largest margin belongs to AMD in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Ryzen 5 4680U scores 1291 against Intel's 792 — a commanding 38.7% advantage. That gap is substantial and reflects a fundamental difference in how each processor handles heavily threaded rendering tasks under that specific benchmark version.

Single-core performance in Cinebench R15 also favors AMD decisively, with the Ryzen 5 4680U posting 170 versus 111 for the Intel Core i3-1125G4, a 34.7% lead. This is not a marginal edge; it is a generational-style gap in a test that typically rewards raw clock speed and per-core efficiency. The Intel part's boost clock of 3.70 GHz simply does not compensate for the AMD's 4.00 GHz ceiling in this scenario.

The picture flips dramatically in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Here, the Intel Core i3-1125G4 scores 7860, outpacing the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U's 7073 by 11.1%. This is the single largest win for Intel in the entire comparison, and it is notable because it contradicts the R15 multi-core result. The R23 test is more sustained and memory-sensitive, and the Intel Tiger Lake architecture's 8 MB shared L3 cache and higher per-core L2 allocation appear to pay off under prolonged load.

Cinebench R23 single-core is the closest contest, with AMD edging Intel by just 4.6% — 1163 versus 1109. This narrow margin suggests that in modern single-threaded workloads, the two processors are far closer than the R15 numbers imply. The Ryzen 5 4680U still wins, but the delta is modest compared to the multi-core swing.

Looking at overall averages, the two chips sit virtually level. The Intel Core i3-1125G4 has an average benchmark score of 2451, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U trails at 2424. Both land in the 48th percentile of all CPUs, and their nearest rivals cluster tightly: Intel's closest competitor, the Intel Core i5-8600, scores 2454 (a 0.1% difference), while AMD's nearest, the Intel Core i5-8500B, scores 2423 (exactly 0% delta). This is a dead heat in aggregate terms, even though individual tests tell a more complex story.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U is the clear winner for legacy and mid-weight multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1291 versus Intel's 792 demonstrates that in shorter rendering bursts, the six-core, twelve-thread AMD configuration delivers far more parallel throughput. The Ryzen also dominates older single-threaded tests, as shown by its 34.7% advantage in R15 single-core, making it the better choice for applications that rely on lightly threaded performance from that era.

Intel's Core i3-1125G4, despite having only 4 cores and 8 threads, reclaims ground in the most current heavy-duty test. The 11.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core — 7860 versus 7073 — is the kind of result that matters for modern rendering, video encoding, and 3D modeling workloads that have been optimized for newer instruction sets and memory access patterns. This is Intel's territory: sustained, contemporary multi-threaded performance.

For single-threaded modern tasks, the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U retains a slim but real advantage, winning R23 single-core by 4.6%. This makes it marginally better for everyday responsive tasks like web browsing, office productivity, and light photo editing, where single-core speed drives perceived performance. The Intel part is not far behind, though, and the 1109 versus 1163 gap is within a range many users would not notice.

The tie in percentile ranking (both at 48th) and the near-identical average scores suggest that casual users in mixed workloads would see little difference. But for specific use cases, the choice matters: AMD for older multi-threaded apps and R15-style short bursts, Intel for sustained modern multi-core rendering.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i3-1125G4 uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically the Willow Cove-U core design, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U employs the Zen 2 architecture under the Renoir codename, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. This process advantage gives AMD a transistor count of 9,800 million on a 156 mm² die, while Intel's die is smaller at 144 mm² but with no transistor count listed — a direct reflection of the denser 7 nm manufacturing.

Core and thread configurations differ sharply. Intel fields 4 cores and 8 threads, while AMD offers 6 cores and 12 threads — a 50% advantage in both core and thread count. Despite this, Intel's per-core cache allocation is larger: 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core versus AMD's 64 KB and 512 KB, respectively. Both share 8 MB of L3 cache, but Intel's larger private caches help explain its competitive multi-core showing despite fewer physical cores.

The integrated graphics also diverge. Intel pairs its CPU with Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4, while AMD includes Radeon Graphics with 448 SP. No benchmark scores are provided for either iGPU, so the comparison rests on architectural capability rather than measured performance. Memory support differs as well: Intel supports both DDR4 and LPDDR4X, whereas AMD lists only LPDDR4, though both run on dual-channel buses. AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s; Intel does not specify any bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity is another split. Intel offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while AMD is limited to Gen 3. This gives Intel a theoretical bandwidth advantage for future NVMe drives and discrete GPUs, though the practical impact in a 15 W mobile part is limited. Both processors have locked multipliers, target the mobile segment, and are end-of-life products. Their release dates are close — Intel on 2021-03-30 and AMD on 2021-04-12 — placing them as direct contemporaries.

Specification Differences

The key specification gaps between the two are stark. Core count differs by two cores (4 versus 6), and thread count by four threads (8 versus 12). Base clocks see AMD at 2.20 GHz versus Intel's 2.00 GHz, and boost clocks widen that gap to 3.70 GHz versus 4.00 GHz. The process node is 10 nm for Intel and 7 nm for AMD, with the latter using TSMC as foundry against Intel's own fabrication.

Cache organization varies significantly: Intel allocates 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, while AMD uses 64 KB and 512 KB per core. Both share 8 MB L3. Memory support differs, with Intel accepting both DDR4 and LPDDR4X while AMD is limited to LPDDR4. Memory bandwidth is only listed for AMD at 34.1 GB/s. PCIe generation favors Intel (Gen 4, 16 lanes) over AMD (Gen 3). The integrated GPU names differ — Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4 versus Radeon Graphics 448SP — and the sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1449 for Intel, AMD Socket FP6 for AMD. Transistor count and die size are listed only for AMD (9,800 million and 156 mm²), while Intel provides only die size (144 mm²). The launch MSRP for Intel is $281; AMD has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U wins three of the four head-to-head comparisons, taking Cinebench R15 multi-core, R15 single-core, and R23 single-core. The Intel Core i3-1125G4 wins only Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: How large is AMD's biggest performance advantage?

A: In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U scores 1291 against Intel's 792, a delta of 38.7%. That is the largest margin in any shared test.

Q: Where does Intel actually beat AMD?

A: Intel wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 7860 versus 7073, an 11.1% advantage. This is the only test where Intel comes out ahead.

Q: Are the two processors comparable in overall performance?

A: Yes. Intel's average benchmark score is 2451 and AMD's is 2424, a difference of just over 1%. Both sit in the 48th percentile of all CPUs, and their nearest rivals show near-zero delta percentages.

Q: Do core counts explain the performance differences?

A: Not entirely. AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads versus Intel's 4 cores and 8 threads, yet Intel wins the most demanding modern multi-core test. Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches likely contribute to this outcome.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U was released on 2021-04-12, while the Intel Core i3-1125G4 launched on 2021-03-30. AMD is newer by roughly two weeks.

The Verdict

The data points to a nuanced recommendation. If the workload involves Cinebench R15-style short multi-threaded bursts or any legacy single-threaded application, the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U is the definitive pick. Its 38.7% lead in R15 multi-core and 34.7% lead in R15 single-core are decisive margins that no other benchmark in this comparison can offset. Users running older rendering engines, legacy CAD tools, or lightly threaded software from the pre-R23 era will see clear benefits from AMD's 6-core, 12-thread configuration and higher 4.00 GHz boost clock.

For modern sustained multi-threaded workloads, the Intel Core i3-1125G4 is the better choice. Its 11.1% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core — 7860 versus 7073 — matters for current rendering, video encoding, and simulation tasks that stress the processor for extended periods. The Intel part's 8 MB shared L3 cache, combined with larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, appears to overcome its core deficit in this scenario. The 10 nm Tiger Lake architecture, despite being on an older process node than AMD's 7 nm, delivers competitive modern performance.

The single-core story favors AMD slightly, with a 4.6% win in R23 single-core and a 34.7% win in R15 single-core. For everyday responsiveness, AMD has the edge, but the modern gap is small enough that most users would not perceive a difference.

Given the near-identical average scores (2451 versus 2424) and matching 48th percentile rankings, neither processor is a clear overall winner. The choice should be driven by the specific software environment: AMD for legacy and short-burst multi-threading plus slightly better modern single-core; Intel for sustained modern multi-threading. The Intel part also carries a $281 launch MSRP, while AMD has none listed. Both are end-of-life mobile processors, so the decision is less about future-proofing and more about matching the existing workload to the architecture that handles it best.