AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 5 240, which wins 14 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 304. The single exception is a narrow single-core Cinebench result, where Intel takes a 1.3% lead.

The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 73,189 versus 24,640. That is a 197% advantage, meaning the Ryzen 5 240 processes more than three times the integer operations per unit time. This gap reflects the fundamental difference in core count and threading, as the AMD chip uses 6 cores and 12 threads against Intel's 5 cores and 5 threads.

Multi-core rendering workloads show a similarly lopsided picture. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 240 posts 13,013 points against Intel's 5,263, a 147.3% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core follows the same pattern: 2,078 versus 849, or 144.8% ahead. These results indicate that the AMD processor delivers roughly two and a half times the sustained multi-threaded rendering throughput in these specific tests.

Data compression and random string sorting also favor AMD heavily. PassMark data compression shows 267,963 for the Ryzen 5 240 versus 114,775 for the Core 3 304, a 133.5% advantage. Random string sorting lands at 32,385 versus 13,659, a 137.1% delta. Both workloads scale well with additional threads, so the 12-thread AMD part naturally dominates the 5-thread Intel part.

Encryption and extended instruction workloads continue the trend. PassMark data encryption records 15,849 versus 8,501, an 86.4% lead for AMD. Extended instructions show 20,201 versus 9,686, a 108.6% margin. Floating point math is less extreme but still substantial: 45,301 versus 29,722, or 52.4% ahead.

The PassMark multithread score confirms the overall pattern: 22,658 for AMD versus 11,625 for Intel, a 94.9% delta. Physics simulation also goes to AMD at 1,060 versus 868, a 22.1% margin. Even the closest compute tests, prime number finding and single-thread performance, favor AMD by small but consistent amounts. Prime numbers show 70 versus 68, a 2.9% edge. PassMark single-thread records 3,675 versus 3,614, a 1.7% advantage.

The only Intel win is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 3 304 scores 1,765 versus 1,742 for the Ryzen 5 240. That 1.3% delta is within typical run-to-run variation for such benchmarks, but the database records it as a genuine Intel victory. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD counters with a 2.3% win (270 versus 264), so the single-thread picture is essentially a tie across the two Cinebench versions.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the AMD Ryzen 5 240 sits at an average score of 33,542 across all recorded tests. That places it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H (33,537, 0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS (33,667, -0.4%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX (33,668, -0.4%). The Intel Core 3 304, by contrast, averages 13,745 and sits in the 68th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13,786, -0.3%), the Intel Core i7-8750H (13,868, -0.9%), and the Intel Core 5 120UL (13,594, 1.1%).

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear separation in intended use cases. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 delivers roughly 2.4 times the average benchmark score of the Intel Core 3 304 (33,542 versus 13,745). For any workload that relies on multi-threaded throughput, including rendering, data compression, encryption, and integer math, the AMD part is the stronger choice by a wide margin.

The Intel Core 3 304 does hold one specific advantage: a single-core Cinebench R23 win at 1,765 versus 1,742. But that 1.3% edge is tiny compared to the multi-core deficits Intel faces. The PassMark single-thread score also goes to AMD, albeit narrowly at 1.7%. Therefore, even for lightly threaded applications, the data does not show a consistent Intel advantage.

The power envelope tells a different story. The Intel Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 watts, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 has a TDP of 45 watts. This threefold difference in thermal design power means the Intel chip is likely suited to fanless or ultra-low-power designs, while the AMD chip requires more substantial cooling. The database does not include battery life or sustained-clock measurements, so any judgment on real-world efficiency must remain qualitative.

From the recorded scores, the AMD Ryzen 5 240 is the pick for users who prioritize compute throughput and have the thermal headroom to support a 45-watt processor. The Intel Core 3 304 is the pick for designs where the 15-watt envelope is the primary constraint, accepting a large multi-core performance trade-off. There is no benchmark in the data where the Intel chip outperforms AMD by more than 1.3%, so the decision hinges on power constraints rather than performance supremacy.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses TSMC's 4 nm process with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 3 304 uses Intel's 3 nm process, though the database does not list transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

The AMD architecture is Zen 4, under the Hawk Point codename, and represents the Ryzen 5 generation. The Intel part uses the Wildcat Lake codename under the Core 3 generation. Both are mobile market segments and both are currently active in production.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 allocates 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 3 304 has 192 KB of total L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's larger L3 cache is consistent with its higher multi-threaded throughput, though the benchmark data does not isolate cache effects from core-count effects.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD chip supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory. The PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ between the two. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses the Radeon 760M. The Intel Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with one Xe core. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores, so no performance comparison can be made from the recorded data.

The release dates are also distinct. The AMD part has a release date of 2025-01-05, while the Intel part is dated 2026-04-15. Both are marked as active production parts.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most consequential specification difference. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading. This explains the large multi-core benchmark gaps.

Clock speeds show a different relationship. The AMD base clock is 4.30 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz. The Intel base clock is much lower at 1.50 GHz, but its boost reaches 4.30 GHz. The lower Intel base clock likely contributes to its 15-watt TDP, while the higher AMD base clock reflects its 45-watt envelope.

The thermal design power difference is 30 watts. The AMD part consumes 45 watts, the Intel part 15 watts. This is the largest single specification gap and has direct implications for cooling and system design.

Memory bus width differs: AMD uses dual-channel, Intel uses single-channel. Memory bandwidth follows: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 59.7 GB/s for Intel. The Intel part supports an additional memory type (LPDDR5X) beyond the DDR5 that both support.

PCIe lane count differs significantly: 20 lanes for AMD versus 6 lanes for Intel, both Gen 4. Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 1516. Process nodes differ: 4 nm TSMC versus 3 nm Intel.

The Intel Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Both are locked multipliers, so neither supports overclocking via multiplier adjustment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 scores 13,013 versus 5,263 for the Intel Core 3 304, a 147.3% advantage for AMD.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel Core 3 304 wins?

A: Yes, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel chip scores 1,765 versus 1,742 for AMD, a 1.3% lead. That is the only Intel win across the 15 recorded head-to-head tests.

Q: How do the thread counts compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, so it does not support simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has a TDP of 45 watts. The Intel Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 watts, a 30-watt difference.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 delivers 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel bus. The Intel Core 3 304 delivers 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare to each processor's nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 averages 33,542 and sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS. The Intel Core 3 304 averages 13,745 and sits within 1.1% of the Intel Core 5 120UL, while trailing the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by 0.3%.