AMD Ryzen 3 30 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 across all eleven shared benchmark tests. The Ryzen 3 30 does not win a single comparison, with the largest margins appearing in compute-heavy workloads and the smallest in single-threaded tasks.

In integer math, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 109,588 against the Ryzen 3 30's 29,846, a delta of 72.8 percent. Floating point math shows a similar gap: 72,722 versus 14,448, or 80.1 percent ahead. Extended instructions widen further, with the AI Max+ 388 reaching 32,719 compared to 6,075, putting it 81.4 percent ahead. Prime number finding is the most lopsided test: 145 versus 20, an 86.2 percent advantage for the larger chip.

The multithread result reflects the core count difference directly. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 posts 33,486, which is 73 percent above the Ryzen 3 30's 9,027. Physics simulation follows a similar pattern: 1,843 versus 436, a 76.3 percent delta. Data compression favors the AI Max+ 388 at 400,887 versus 135,834, a 66.1 percent gap, while random string sorting shows 43,196 against 14,431, a 66.6 percent difference. Data encryption completes the workload list with 20,092 against 6,461, a 67.8 percent margin.

Single-thread performance is the closest contest, but still clearly favors the Ryzen AI Max+ 388. It scores 4,185 in the PassMark single-thread test, while the Ryzen 3 30 manages 2,465. That is a 41.1 percent lead. The data confirms that the AI Max+ 388 does not merely scale with more cores; it also delivers substantially higher per-thread throughput, likely due to architectural differences covered in a later section.

For context, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 49,796. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 9 273PE at 49,845 (0.1 percent behind), the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49,394 (0.8 percent ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49,228 (1.2 percent ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49,196 (1.2 percent ahead). The Ryzen 3 30, by contrast, sits at the 74th percentile with an average score of 20,137. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165U at 20,249 (0.6 percent behind), the AMD EPYC 7713P at 20,024 (0.6 percent ahead), the Intel Core i7-9700K at 20,271 (0.7 percent behind), and the Intel Core i7-11800H at 19,998 (0.7 percent ahead). The average score gap between the two processors is roughly 2.5x, which aligns with the multithread delta.

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the stronger processor in every measured category, and the margins are not marginal. For workloads that stress integer math, floating point, encryption, or compression, the AI Max+ 388 delivers between 66 and 86 percent higher throughput. Even in single-threaded tasks, where core count matters less, it leads by 41.1 percent.

The Ryzen 3 30, however, occupies a different segment. Its 74th percentile rank and 20,137 average score place it among mainstream mobile parts, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.7 percent. The AI Max+ 388, with a 90th percentile rank, competes with desktop-class processors like the Intel Core i5-14600KF and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, both within 1.2 percent. The data does not suggest that the Ryzen 3 30 is a weak chip; it suggests that it is aimed at a lower performance tier, likely for thin-and-light systems where power draw and thermal limits matter more than raw throughput.

Users who need maximum compute density in a mobile package should look at the AI Max+ 388. Users who prioritize efficiency and lighter workloads may find the Ryzen 3 30 adequate, but the database shows no scenario where it outperforms the larger chip. The verdict is straightforward: the AI Max+ 388 wins outright on every recorded metric, and the Ryzen 3 30's only advantage is in its lower power envelope, not in performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and use different manufacturing processes. The Ryzen 3 30 uses Zen 2 architecture under the Mendocino codename, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process at the same foundry. The die size differs substantially: the Ryzen 3 30 measures 100 mm², while the AI Max+ 388 uses two dies of 70.6 mm² each, for a combined area of roughly 141.2 mm².

Cache organization is also different. The Ryzen 3 30 provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The AI Max+ 388 provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The L3 capacity is eight times larger on the AI Max+ 388, which partly explains its strong showing in compression and encryption workloads where working sets exceed small cache sizes.

Memory support differs as well. The Ryzen 3 30 uses LPDDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 88.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AI Max+ 388 uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That is nearly three times the memory bandwidth, which directly benefits the floating point and integer math tests. The AI Max+ 388 also supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 3 30 does not.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The Ryzen 3 30 offers PCIe Gen 3 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the AI Max+ 388 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the Ryzen 3 30 carries a Radeon 610M, while the AI Max+ 388 carries a Radeon 8060S. The socket changes as well, with the Ryzen 3 30 using AMD Socket FT6 and the AI Max+ 388 using AMD Socket FP11.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two parts differ, based on the recorded specifications.

| Field | AMD Ryzen 3 30 | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.10 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 55 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FT6 | AMD Socket FP11 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Mendocino | Strix Halo |

| Process node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Die size | 100 mm² | 2x 70.6 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 512 KB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 4 MB shared | 32 MB shared |

| Memory support | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 88.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| ECC memory | False | True |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 4 Lanes | Gen 4, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 610M | Radeon 8060S |

| Part number | Unknown | 100-000001980 |

| Release date | 2025-09-30 | 2026-01-05 |

The release dates differ by roughly three months, with the Ryzen 3 30 appearing first. Both parts are listed as Active in production status, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. Neither processor supports an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 30 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In the PassMark single-thread test, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 4,185 versus the Ryzen 3 30's 2,465, a 41.1 percent advantage for the AI Max+ 388.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the Ryzen AI Max+ 388?

A: The AI Max+ 388 has 32 MB of shared L3, while the Ryzen 3 30 has 4 MB of shared L3. That is an eightfold difference.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Ryzen 3 30 supports dual-channel LPDDR5 with 88.0 GB/s. The AI Max+ 388 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Ryzen 3 30 boosts to 4.10 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has ECC memory support, but the Ryzen 3 30 does not.