AMD Ryzen 3 210 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 3 210 and Intel Core 3 305 is heavily lopsided. The Intel part wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the AMD chip claims only 3 victories. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the Intel Core 3 305 sits at 18302, roughly 5.7% above the AMD Ryzen 3 210's 17321.

Looking at the Cinebench results, the Intel Core 3 305 delivers a consistent advantage across all six tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel score of 13123 beats the AMD score of 11198 by 14.7%. The single-core gap is nearly identical: 1852 versus 1581, a 14.6% margin. Cinebench R20 shows the same pattern, with the Intel part leading by 14.7% in multi-core (5511 vs 4703) and 14.5% in single-core (777 vs 664). The R15 results repeat this story, with Intel ahead by 14.7% in multi-core (1322 vs 1128) and 14.5% in single-core (186 vs 159). These consistent deltas suggest a fundamental per-core performance advantage for the Intel design, not merely a thread-count effect.

The PassMark suite reveals a more nuanced picture. The Intel Core 3 305 wins floating point math by a massive 44.1% margin (42284 vs 23649), physics by 33.4% (1233 vs 821), and prime number finding by 57.4% (115 vs 49). Data encryption also favors Intel substantially, with a 21.9% lead (11019 vs 8607), and extended instructions show a 15.4% advantage (13543 vs 11464). The multi-thread PassMark score goes to Intel by 12% (15439 vs 13585), and single-thread by 6.4% (3977 vs 3724).

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 fights back in three specific workloads. Integer math shows a 17.5% AMD advantage (37933 vs 32295). Data compression favors AMD by 3.5% (152017 vs 146857). Random string sorting goes to AMD by 10.4% (19454 vs 17623). These wins cluster around integer-heavy, memory-access-pattern workloads, which suggests the AMD architecture handles certain data manipulation tasks more efficiently despite losing the broader performance race.

The percentile rankings place both chips close together: the AMD Ryzen 3 210 sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 3 305 reaches the 72nd percentile. The nearest rival data confirms the narrow overall positioning: the AMD chip's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 5 4500 with an average score of 17333 (a 0.1% gap), while the Intel part's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (a 0.1% gap). Both chips occupy a similar performance tier in the global database, even though their head-to-head results diverge sharply.

Architecture Differences

The two processors take fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen 3 210 uses Zen 4 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm process node, with the Hawk Point codename. It packs 4 cores and 8 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on Intel's 3 nm process, with 6 physical cores and 6 threads, no hyperthreading at all. The core counts differ, but the thread counts tell the real story: AMD reaches 8 threads from 4 cores, while Intel stays at 6 threads from 6 cores.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The AMD chip allocates 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Intel part lists 192 KB of total L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The per-core L2 allocation heavily favors AMD, which provides 1 MB per core versus Intel's roughly 417 KB per core. However, the Intel L3 cache, while smaller in total, spans fewer threads, which may explain its strong single-core results.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The AMD Ryzen 3 210 supports DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but runs on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. That is a 33.4% bandwidth deficit for Intel, yet the Intel chip still wins most benchmarks, indicating that raw memory bandwidth does not dictate overall performance in these workloads.

The process nodes and foundries also differ: AMD uses TSMC's 4 nm process with 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, while Intel uses its own 3 nm process with no transistor or die size data recorded. The AMD chip reports a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, while the Intel part runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost. Thermal design power shows a notable split: the AMD chip draws 28 W, the Intel chip only 15 W. That lower power envelope, combined with the higher benchmark scores, gives the Intel part a striking efficiency profile.

PCIe lane counts also differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes, Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 740M, Intel uses the Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both are locked multipliers. The AMD part uses the AMD Socket FP7, while Intel uses the Intel BGA 1516. The release dates are far apart: AMD launched on 2025-01-05, Intel on 2026-04-15.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear overall winner in the Intel Core 3 305. It wins the majority of benchmark tests, often by double-digit margins, while drawing 13 W less power. The Cinebench results are uniformly in Intel's favor with roughly 14.5% to 14.7% leads across every test. The PassMark suite shows Intel dominance in floating point, physics, encryption, extended instructions, and multi-thread performance. The single-thread PassMark score also favors Intel by 6.4%.

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 retains a narrow set of advantages. Its integer math performance leads by 17.5%, data compression by 3.5%, and random string sorting by 10.4%. These wins suggest that workloads dominated by integer operations and certain data rearrangement patterns may favor the AMD architecture. The dual-channel memory bus provides substantially more bandwidth, though this did not translate into broad benchmark victories.

For a buyer choosing strictly from the recorded data, the Intel Core 3 305 offers the higher average benchmark score (18302 vs 17321), the higher percentile ranking (72nd vs 71st), and the broader set of test wins. The AMD chip does not win any Cinebench test, and its PassMark wins are confined to three specific workloads. The Intel part's 15 W TDP compared to AMD's 28 W further strengthens its position for mobile use cases where power efficiency matters.

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 might be preferable for someone specifically targeting integer-heavy tasks or data compression workloads, where its margins are substantial. But for general-purpose computing as measured by the database, the Intel Core 3 305 delivers superior results in most categories. The fact that Intel achieves this while consuming less power and running on a single-channel memory bus makes its overall performance profile particularly notable.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 scores 18302, while the AMD Ryzen 3 210 scores 17321. The Intel part also ranks at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 71st percentile for AMD.

Q: How large is the Cinebench R23 multi-core performance gap?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 scores 13123, which is 14.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen 3 210's 11198. The single-core R23 test shows a 14.6% Intel advantage (1852 vs 1581).

Q: In which benchmarks does the AMD Ryzen 3 210 win?

A: The AMD chip wins PassMark data compression (152017 vs 146857, a 3.5% margin), integer math (37933 vs 32295, a 17.5% margin), and random string sorting (19454 vs 17623, a 10.4% margin).

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth specifications compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 uses a dual-channel DDR5 bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 has a TDP of 28 W. The Intel Core 3 305 has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel part delivers higher benchmark scores while drawing 13 W less.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 305 dominates the rendering and synthetic compute categories. All six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both single and multi-core) go to Intel with margins between 14.5% and 14.7%. The PassMark floating point math test shows Intel's largest win at 44.1%, followed by physics at 33.4% and prime number finding at 57.4%. Data encryption (21.9% lead) and extended instructions (15.4% lead) also belong to Intel. The multi-thread PassMark score favors Intel by 12%, and single-thread performance goes to Intel by 6.4%.

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 wins in three specific PassMark workloads. Integer math shows a 17.5% AMD advantage, the largest of its three wins. Random string sorting gives AMD a 10.4% margin. Data compression is the closest AMD victory at 3.5%. These wins suggest that workloads involving integer arithmetic, string manipulation, and compression algorithms may run relatively better on the AMD chip. The dual-channel memory bus likely contributes to the compression and sorting results, though the data does not isolate that factor directly.

The overall win count heavily favors Intel: 14 wins versus 3. The average benchmark scores and percentile rankings also favor Intel, though the percentile gap is just one point. For users prioritizing floating point compute, encryption, physics simulation, or general multi-threaded rendering, the Intel Core 3 305 is the clear choice from the data. For users focused on integer-heavy data processing or compression tasks, the AMD Ryzen 3 210 offers measurable advantages.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification field. The AMD Ryzen 3 210 uses 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks differ: AMD runs at 3.00 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks also differ: AMD reaches 4.70 GHz, Intel reaches 4.30 GHz. The TDP split is 28 W for AMD versus 15 W for Intel.

The process nodes differ: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm from its own foundry. Die size and transistor counts are recorded only for AMD: 137 mm² and 20,900 million transistors. Cache configurations diverge: AMD has 64 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core with 8 MB shared L3; Intel has 192 KB total L1 and 2.5 MB L2 with 6 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: AMD uses DDR5 on dual-channel with 89.6 GB/s; Intel uses DDR5 and LPDDR5X on single-channel with 59.7 GB/s. PCIe support: AMD Gen 4 with 14 lanes, Intel Gen 4 with 6 lanes. Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 740M versus Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. Sockets differ: AMD Socket FP7 versus Intel BGA 1516. Release dates: AMD on 2025-01-05, Intel on 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $309. Both have locked multipliers and no ECC support.