5 320 vs Athlon 3000G
Aggregate performance score
Core 5 320 outperforms Athlon 3000G by a whopping 239% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2045 | 1092 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.27 | 11.04 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.06 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Zen+ (2018−2019) | Wildcat Lake (2026) |
| Release date | 7 November 2019 (6 years ago) | 16 April 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $49 | $340 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Core 5 320 has 109% better value for money than Athlon 3000G.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Bus type | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2? | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4940 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | Intel BGA 1516 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR5, LPDDR5X |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB? | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon Vega 3 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 3000G and Core 5 320.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | 6 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.56 | 8.69 |
| Recency | 7 November 2019 | 16 April 2026 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 15 Watt |
Core 5 320 has a 239% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 200% more physical cores and 50% more threads, a 367% more advanced lithography process, and 133% lower power consumption.
The Intel Core 5 320 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon 3000G in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 3000G is a desktop processor while Core 5 320 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
