AMD Ryzen 3 30 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus compare to the AMD Ryzen 3 30 in overall benchmark score?

A: The Intel part posts an average benchmark score of 79574, while the AMD part records 20137. The Intel processor sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, whereas the AMD processor lands in the 74th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 3 30 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel part also has a higher boost clock, reaching 5.50 GHz compared to the AMD part's 4.10 GHz.

Q: What are the process node differences?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is built on a 3 nm process by TSMC, while the AMD Ryzen 3 30 uses a 6 nm process from the same foundry. The Intel silicon integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, whereas the AMD die is 100 mm².

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports ECC memory; the AMD Ryzen 3 30 does not. Both support dual-channel memory, but Intel uses DDR5 and AMD uses LPDDR5.

Q: What is the single-thread score difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 4951 in PassMark single-thread, while the AMD Ryzen 3 30 scores 2465. The Intel part leads by 50.2% in that test.

Q: How many benchmark wins does each processor have in the head-to-head set?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins all 11 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 3 30 records zero wins.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the superior processor in every measured workload. With an average benchmark score of 79574 versus 20137 for the AMD Ryzen 3 30, the Intel part delivers roughly four times the aggregate performance. Its 95th percentile ranking versus the AMD part's 74th percentile confirms that the Intel chip competes at the top of the database, while the AMD part sits closer to mid-range mobile territory.

For users who need maximum throughput in multi-threaded applications, the Intel part is the only rational choice. It wins every head-to-head test, from integer math (164839 versus 29846) to floating-point math (201773 versus 14448) to multithread (59439 versus 9027). The Intel chip also dominates memory-intensive workloads like data compression, where it scores 658724 against the AMD part's 135834.

The AMD Ryzen 3 30, however, is not without a role. Its 15 W TDP, 6 nm process, and compact 100 mm² die suggest it is engineered for efficiency and low-power mobile devices. The data does not include battery life or thermal measurements, but the specification gap indicates a fundamentally different design target. The AMD part uses LPDDR5 memory and has a 88.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than the Intel part's 102.4 GB/s, but the lower power envelope could be preferable in fanless or ultra-thin chassis.

No user should pick the AMD Ryzen 3 30 for raw performance. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is ahead by 50.2% even in single-thread, which is the AMD part's closest contest. The verdict is straightforward: the Intel chip for any performance-sensitive workload, the AMD chip only when the power budget is the primary constraint and performance expectations are modest.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus dominates every recorded benchmark. The largest margin comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 519 against AMD's 20, a delta of -96.1% from the AMD perspective. That means the Intel part is roughly 26 times faster in that specific workload.

Floating-point math shows a similar chasm. Intel scores 201773, AMD scores 14448, a -92.8% delta. This translates to about 14 times the throughput, which points to a massive advantage in scientific, simulation, and any FP-heavy code. Extended instructions follow the same pattern: Intel at 51290, AMD at 6075, a -88.2% delta.

The multithread test is another decisive victory. Intel records 59439, AMD records 9027, a -84.8% delta. Physics simulation shows Intel at 3387 versus AMD at 436, a -87.1% delta. Data encryption is similarly one-sided: Intel at 50008, AMD at 6461, a -87.1% delta.

Integer math is slightly less lopsided but still overwhelming: Intel at 164839, AMD at 29846, a -81.9% delta. Random string sorting sees Intel at 80327 and AMD at 14431, a -82% delta. Data compression, while still a clear Intel win, shows the smallest relative gap among the multithreaded tests: Intel at 658724, AMD at 135834, a -79.4% delta.

The single-thread tests are the closest comparison, but Intel still wins by half. Intel scores 4951 in both PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests; AMD scores 2465 in both. The delta is -50.2%. This shows that even per-core performance, where smaller chips often close the gap, is firmly in Intel's favor.

The benchmark data confirms that the Intel part is not merely faster, it is faster by a factor of 5 to 25 depending on the workload. The AMD part's closest result is the 50.2% single-thread deficit, which is still a decisive loss.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 3 30 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel part does not support simultaneous multithreading, but its core count provides a 6x advantage.

Base clock speeds are close: AMD at 2.40 GHz, Intel at 2.70 GHz. Boost clocks diverge sharply: AMD reaches 4.10 GHz, Intel reaches 5.50 GHz. The Intel part has a 55 W TDP, while the AMD part is rated at 15 W.

Socket compatibility is entirely separate. The AMD chip uses AMD Socket FT6; the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 2114. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier disabled, while the Intel part has an unlocked multiplier enabled.

Memory support differs by type: AMD uses LPDDR5, Intel uses DDR5. Both are dual-channel, but memory bandwidth favors Intel at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 88.0 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity is also different. AMD provides PCIe Gen 3 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part offers both a newer generation and five times the lane count.

Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 610M, Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The AMD part has a 100 mm² die size; the Intel part is 243 mm². Transistor count is listed only for Intel at 17,800 million.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 3 30 is built on the Zen 2 architecture with the Mendocino codename. It belongs to the Ryzen 3 generation and uses a 6 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is built on the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2, and uses a 3 nm process also from TSMC.

Cache hierarchies are vastly different. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Intel L3 cache is nine times larger in total.

The transistor integration reflects the process and design gap. Intel packs 17,800 million transistors into its 243 mm² die. AMD does not list a transistor count but uses a 100 mm² die, suggesting a much simpler design.

The Intel part includes a part number (SADSS) and has an unlocked multiplier, indicating overclocking support. The AMD part lists an unknown part number and a locked multiplier. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which is absent on the AMD side.

Release dates show the Intel part is newer: March 2026 versus September 2025 for AMD. Both are listed as Active in production status and both target the Mobile market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins in every measurable benchmark category. The data shows eleven victories out of eleven head-to-head tests. This includes all PassMark workloads: data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread.

The most extreme Intel advantages are in prime number finding (26x), floating-point math (14x), and extended instructions (8.4x). These are compute-heavy workloads that scale with core count, clock speed, and cache size. The Intel part's 24 cores, 36 MB L3, and 5.50 GHz boost clock deliver results that the AMD part cannot approach.

The Intel part also wins in memory-sensitive tests. Data compression at 658724 versus 135834 shows a 4.9x advantage, driven by higher memory bandwidth (102.4 GB/s versus 88.0 GB/s) and a much larger cache hierarchy. Random string sorting shows a 5.6x advantage, further confirming the memory subsystem superiority.

The AMD Ryzen 3 30 does not win any benchmark in the recorded set. Its only potential advantage is power efficiency, inferred from the 15 W TDP versus 55 W TDP. This is not measured in the benchmark data, but the specification suggests that the AMD part could sustain operation in thermally constrained devices where the Intel part would require substantial cooling.

The AMD part's lower core count and smaller die size also point to a lower manufacturing cost, but pricing is not available in the database. For single-thread responsiveness, the AMD part still loses by 50.2%. For any multi-threaded task, the Intel part is the clear winner, often by an order of magnitude.

In summary, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the performance leader across the board. The AMD Ryzen 3 30 is a low-power mobile processor that sacrifices performance for a much lower thermal envelope. The data does not support any workload where the AMD part outperforms the Intel part.