AMD Ryzen 5 130 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The dataset in this comparison is uneven, as the AMD Ryzen 5 130 carries no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the Intel Core 3 304 has a full set of measurements. This means the head-to-head analysis relies entirely on Intel’s recorded results, with the Ryzen 5 130’s performance inferred only from its architectural parameters rather than direct measurements. The Intel Core 3 304 posts an average benchmark score of 13745, placing it at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13786, which is 0.3% higher, and the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868, which leads by 0.9%. The Intel Core 5 120UL trails at 13594, a 1.1% gap, while the AMD EPYC 7443 sits at 13936, 1.4% above the Core 3 304. These deltas are narrow, suggesting the Core 3 304 sits in a tightly packed performance band where small architectural differences decide placement.

Focusing on the Intel Core 3 304’s Cinebench results, the multicore scores show a clear progression across renderer versions. In Cinebench R15, the chip records 849 points multicore and 264 points single-core. Moving to R20, the multicore score climbs to 4160 with a single-core result of 587. In R23, the multicore figure reaches 5263, while single-core lands at 1765. The ratio between single-core and multicore in R23 is roughly 3 to 1, which aligns with a processor that has limited thread parallelism. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, so it cannot leverage simultaneous multithreading; the multicore scaling reflects only physical core count.

PassMark results for the Intel Core 3 304 reveal its strongest and weakest areas. The data compression test returns 114775, which is the highest raw score in the entire PassMark suite for this chip. Data encryption follows at 8501, and extended instructions score 9686. Floating point math reaches 29722, while integer math hits 24640. The multithread score is 11625, and single-thread performance is 3614. The physics test records 868, random string sorting 13659, and find prime numbers returns just 68. The prime number test is notably low relative to the other integer workloads, indicating that the chip’s execution resources are not optimized for that specific pattern of integer iteration. The single-thread score of 3614 appears twice in the dataset, once under the label for single-thread and once under a variant with the same value, confirming consistency in that measurement.

Because the Ryzen 5 130 has no benchmark entries, the database cannot provide a direct numeric comparison between the two processors. The wins tally shows zero for both sides. What the data does offer is a full profile of the Intel chip’s behavior across rendering, encryption, compression, and math workloads, which serves as a reference point for what the Ryzen 5 130 would need to exceed in each category to claim a victory.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 and Intel Core 3 304 diverge sharply in their underlying designs. The Ryzen 5 130 uses the Zen 3+ architecture under the Rembrandt-R codename, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with a 3 nm process fabricated by Intel itself. The process node difference is substantial: Intel’s 3 nm node offers a smaller transistor geometry than AMD’s 6 nm node, which typically allows for higher density and potentially lower power draw per transistor, though the data does not quantify those effects directly.

Core counts differ meaningfully. The Ryzen 5 130 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core 3 304 provides 5 cores and 5 threads, with no multithreading support. This means the AMD part can process two threads per core, while the Intel part processes one. For workloads that scale with thread count, the Ryzen 5 130 has a theoretical advantage of 7 additional threads. The cache hierarchies reflect this difference in scale. The Ryzen 5 130 allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 3 304 lists 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen 5 130’s L3 is more than double the Intel chip’s, which can benefit workloads with large working sets that need repeated access to shared data.

Clock speeds also separate the two. The Ryzen 5 130 has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.55 GHz. The Intel Core 3 304 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The base clock gap is large, with AMD running nearly twice as fast at idle or lightly threaded loads. The boost clocks are closer, with the AMD part ahead by 0.25 GHz. The Intel chip’s lower base clock likely reflects its 15 W TDP, compared to the Ryzen 5 130’s 28 W TDP. The power envelope difference suggests the Intel part is designed for more thermally constrained environments, while the AMD part can sustain higher sustained frequencies under load.

Memory support further distinguishes the pair. The Ryzen 5 130 supports DDR5 only, with a dual-channel memory bus and a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel Core 3 304 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but uses a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The bandwidth gap is 17.1 GB/s in favor of AMD, and the dual-channel configuration can reduce latency for memory-bound tasks. The Intel chip’s support for LPDDR5X may allow for lower power memory configurations in compact systems, but the single-channel bus caps the maximum throughput. ECC memory is supported on the Ryzen 5 130, while the Intel Core 3 304 does not list ECC support, which matters for error-sensitive compute workloads.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Ryzen 5 130 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes. The lane count disparity is significant for expandability. The AMD part can drive multiple NVMe drives or a discrete GPU with room to spare, while the Intel part is limited to basic connectivity. Both use Gen 4, so the per-lane bandwidth is the same, but the total available bandwidth is far higher on the AMD side. Integrated graphics also differ: the Ryzen 5 130 uses Radeon 660M, while the Intel Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The data does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison can be made.

The Ryzen 5 130 has a die size of 210 mm², while the Intel Core 3 304 has no recorded die size. The manufacturing process and die size differences imply divergent design priorities, with AMD using a larger, more complex die on a mature 6 nm node, and Intel using a smaller, more advanced 3 nm node. The Intel part’s launch MSRP is $309, while the Ryzen 5 130 has no recorded launch price. Both processors are mobile parts, listed as Active in production status, with release dates in late 2025 for AMD and mid-2026 for Intel. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either.

Where Each One Wins

Based solely on the recorded data, the Intel Core 3 304 has measurable strengths in specific workloads. Its PassMark data compression score of 114775 indicates strong performance in compression algorithms, which often rely on efficient integer and memory operations. The floating point math score of 29722 and integer math score of 24640 show balanced arithmetic throughput. The single-thread score of 3614 suggests that for lightly threaded applications, the Intel chip’s boost clock of 4.30 GHz delivers competitive responsiveness. The multithread score of 11625 reflects its 5-core design, and while it lacks SMT, the 3 nm process allows the cores to run efficiently within a 15 W power envelope.

The Ryzen 5 130, despite having no benchmark scores, has architectural parameters that point to likely advantages in thread-heavy scenarios. With 12 threads versus 5, the AMD part should handle parallel workloads such as rendering, video encoding, and compilation more effectively, provided the software can use more than 5 threads. The dual-channel memory bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth gives it a clear edge in memory-intensive tasks, as the Intel chip’s single-channel bus at 59.7 GB/s creates a bottleneck for data streaming. The larger 16 MB L3 cache can hold more working data, reducing repeated fetches from main memory. The higher base clock of 2.90 GHz also supports sustained throughput in situations where boost clocks cannot be maintained indefinitely.

For single-threaded performance, the data suggests a closer contest. The Intel Core 3 304 boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Ryzen 5 130 boosts to 4.55 GHz. The AMD part has a 0.25 GHz advantage at peak, but the Intel chip’s smaller process node may allow it to hold boost clocks longer within its 15 W limit. The lack of direct benchmarks for the Ryzen 5 130 means this remains speculative. The Intel chip’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1765 provides a concrete reference, but no equivalent exists for the AMD part in the database.

In power-constrained scenarios, the Intel Core 3 304 holds an advantage by design. Its 15 W TDP is 13 W lower than the Ryzen 5 130’s 28 W TDP. For fanless or passively cooled systems, or for devices where battery life is a priority, the Intel chip’s lower power draw is a clear benefit. The AMD part’s higher TDP suggests it needs more substantial cooling, but it also implies the ability to sustain higher performance under load if thermal limits allow.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split. The Intel Core 3 304 has recorded benchmark scores, a 68th percentile placement, and a profile that shows strong single-thread and compression performance within a low power envelope. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no recorded scores, which prevents direct comparison, but its architectural features point to advantages in multithreaded and memory-heavy workloads. The Ryzen 5 130 offers 12 threads, dual-channel memory at 76.8 GB/s, 16 MB of L3 cache, and a higher boost clock of 4.55 GHz. The Intel Core 3 304 offers 5 threads, single-channel memory at 59.7 GB/s, 6 MB of L3 cache, and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, all within a 15 W TDP.

For users prioritizing thread count, memory bandwidth, and cache capacity, the Ryzen 5 130 is the stronger choice based on its specifications. For users prioritizing power efficiency, compact systems, or who need a processor with verified benchmark results, the Intel Core 3 304 has the measurable edge. The Intel chip’s nearest rival deltas, all within 1.4%, indicate it performs in a well-established band, while the Ryzen 5 130’s 50th percentile placement, based on specifications alone, suggests it sits at the median of all CPUs in the database. The absence of Ryzen 5 130 benchmarks is the limiting factor in this comparison; the database cannot confirm whether its architectural advantages translate into actual performance wins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a TDP of 28 W. The Intel Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 304 support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 3 304 does not list ECC memory support. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 does support ECC memory.

Q: What are the Cinebench R23 scores for the Intel Core 3 304?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 scores 5263 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1765 in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a dual-channel memory bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 304 has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the Intel Core 3 304’s percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 is at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13745.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen 5 130 | Intel Core 3 304 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 5 |

| Threads | 12 | 5 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.55 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 192 KB |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB per core | 2.5 MB |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $309 |

| Release Date | 2025-09-30 | 2026-04-15 |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | Not recorded |

| Percentile | 50th | 68th |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 13745 |