AMD EPYC 7643 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7643 and Intel Core 3 305 occupy opposite ends of the processor spectrum. The EPYC is a 48-core server part built for throughput, while the Core 3 is a 6-core mobile chip designed for efficiency. Benchmark data from the database shows a decisive performance gap across all recorded Cinebench tests, with the EPYC leading by margins that exceed 390% in every case.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7643 scores 6515 against 1322 for the Core 3, a 392.8% advantage. The single-core test shows 919 versus 186, a 394.1% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core score is 27149 for the EPYC and 5511 for the Core 3, a 392.6% difference, while single-core is 3832 versus 777, a 393.2% gap. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multi-core 64642 against 13123, a 392.6% lead, and single-core 9126 versus 1852, a 392.8% advantage.

These numbers mean the EPYC is roughly five times faster in every measured workload. The consistency of the margin, from 392.6% to 394.1%, indicates that the performance difference is not workload-specific but reflects a fundamental capability gap. Even in single-threaded tests, where the Core 3's higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz might be expected to help, the EPYC's 3.60 GHz boost and Zen 3 architecture deliver a 392.8% higher score. The Core 3 does not win a single benchmark in the head-to-head set.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The EPYC has an average score of 18697, while the Core 3 sits at 18302. The EPYC also holds a slightly higher percentile rank, at 73 versus 72 for the Core 3. These aggregate figures, however, mask the extreme divergence in the Cinebench tests, which are the only shared benchmarks in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7643 has 48 cores and 96 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The EPYC 7643 scores 9126 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Core 3 scores 1852, a 392.8% advantage for the EPYC. Despite the Core 3's higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz, the EPYC's 3.60 GHz boost and architecture produce a much higher score.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The EPYC 7643 supports ECC memory. The Core 3 305 does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core 3 305 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe). The EPYC 7643 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The EPYC 7643 has 204.8 GB/s bandwidth via eight-channel DDR4. The Core 3 305 has 59.7 GB/s via single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The Core 3 305 was released on 2026-04-15, while the EPYC 7643 was released on 2021-03-14. The Core 3 is newer by several years.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The EPYC 7643 uses Zen 3, codenamed Milan, on a 7 nm process from TSMC. It packs 33,200 million transistors across a die size of 8x 81 mm². The Core 3 305 uses Wildcat Lake on Intel's 3 nm process, with no transistor count or die size listed in the database.

Core and cache configurations diverge sharply. The EPYC has 48 cores and 96 threads, with 64 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, plus a shared 256 MB L3 cache. The Core 3 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC's L3 cache is over 40 times larger, which directly benefits multi-threaded and data-intensive workloads.

Memory support also differs. The EPYC uses DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 3 uses DDR5 or LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC supports ECC memory, the Core 3 does not. PCIe connectivity is another major gap: the EPYC provides 128 Gen4 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 3 provides 6 Gen4 lanes. The Core 3 includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics.

The process node difference is notable: 7 nm for the EPYC versus 3 nm for the Core 3. The Core 3's newer node and later release date (2026-04-15 versus 2021-03-14) do not translate into higher benchmark scores, as the head-to-head results show. The EPYC's server-oriented design, with its massive core count and cache, dominates in all recorded Cinebench tests.

Specification Differences

The following table lists the fields where the two processors differ, based on the database records.

| Field | AMD EPYC 7643 | Intel Core 3 305 |

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

| Series | EPYC 7003 series | Not specified |

| Cores | 48 | 6 |

| Threads | 96 | 6 |

| Base clock | 2.30 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.60 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 225 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Not specified |

| Codename | Milan | Wildcat Lake |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 3 (Milan)) | Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) |

| Process node | 7 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 33,200 million | Not specified |

| Die size | 8x 81 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Eight-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | None | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Market segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release date | 2021-03-14 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $4995 | $309 |

| Part number | 100-000000326100-100000326WOF | SAE3L |

Both processors have locked multipliers and are currently active in production.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The EPYC 7643 wins every recorded benchmark, with margins exceeding 390% in all Cinebench tests. It offers 48 cores, 96 threads, ECC memory, 128 PCIe lanes, and 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, making it a clear choice for server and workstation workloads that demand parallel throughput and large data handling. Its average benchmark score of 18697 and 73rd percentile rank reflect strong overall performance, though the head-to-head results are far more decisive.

The Core 3 305, with 6 cores, 6 threads, a 15 W TDP, and integrated graphics, targets low-power mobile systems. Its 3 nm process and newer release date do not compensate for the performance gap in the recorded tests. The Core 3's single-channel memory and limited PCIe lanes further restrict its suitability for compute-heavy tasks. However, its integrated graphics and low power envelope make it appropriate for lightweight mobile use where battery life and portability take precedence over raw performance.

For any user prioritizing computational performance, the EPYC 7643 is the only rational choice based on the benchmark data. For those who need a compact, power-efficient processor with integrated graphics, the Core 3 305 serves that niche, but it cannot match the EPYC in any measured workload. The verdict is clear: the EPYC dominates in performance, while the Core 3 offers efficiency and integration at the cost of speed.