AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data delivers a decisive outcome: the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins all 17 head-to-head tests against the Intel Core 3 304. The AMD processor holds an average benchmark score of 32,750, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part averages 13,745 and sits in the 68th percentile. The AMD chip is the clear choice for any workload that benefits from multi-threaded performance, as its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,765 is 313.5% higher than the Intel's 5,263. The Intel Core 3 304 is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, designed for power-constrained systems, and its benchmark results reflect that positioning. The data indicates the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is for desktop users who need strong multi-core throughput, while the Intel Core 3 304 is for mobile systems where low power consumption takes priority over raw performance. The AMD part also leads in single-threaded workloads, though by a much narrower margin of 2.1% in PassMark single-thread testing, which makes the Intel part more competitive in lightly threaded tasks relative to its multi-core deficit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F uses the Zen 4 architecture on the Raphael codename, built on a 5 nm process from TSMC with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. It is a desktop part with a 65 W TDP, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process from Intel, with 5 cores and 5 threads, and a 15 W TDP. The Intel part is a mobile processor with a BGA 1516 socket, while the AMD chip uses AMD Socket AM5.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD processor allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 cache total, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip's larger L3 cache is a significant advantage for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets. Memory support also diverges: the AMD processor supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity favors AMD with Gen 5 and 24 lanes, versus Intel's Gen 4 and 6 lanes. The Intel Core 3 304 includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD chip launched on 2025-01-08 with a launch MSRP of $229, and the Intel part launched on 2026-04-15 with a launch MSRP of $309.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F dominates in multi-core tests. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,765 is 313.5% higher than the Intel Core 3 304's 5,263, and its PassMark multi-thread score of 25,645 is 120.6% higher than the Intel's 11,625.

Q: How close are the two in single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD processor wins every single-threaded test but by varying margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD score of 3,072 is 74.1% higher than the Intel's 1,765. In PassMark single-thread, the AMD score of 3,689 is only 2.1% higher than the Intel's 3,614.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The AMD processor's simultaneous multithreading gives it a substantial thread advantage.

Q: What memory types do they support?

A: The AMD processor supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus. The Intel processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus. The AMD part's memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s, compared to 59.7 GB/s for the Intel part.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel Core 3 304 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has a 65 W TDP. The Intel Core 3 304 has a 15 W TDP, reflecting its mobile design and much lower power envelope.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F uses 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 uses 5 cores and 5 threads. Base clocks are 3.70 GHz for AMD versus 1.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 4.70 GHz for AMD versus 4.30 GHz for Intel. TDP is 65 W for AMD versus 15 W for Intel. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1516. The process node is 5 nm from TSMC for AMD, versus 3 nm from Intel for the Intel part. The AMD processor has 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die; the Intel part has no transistor or die size figures recorded. L1 cache is 64 KB per core for AMD versus 192 KB total for Intel. L2 cache is 1 MB per core for AMD versus 2.5 MB total for Intel. L3 cache is 32 MB shared for AMD versus 6 MB shared for Intel. Memory support is DDR5 for AMD versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X for Intel. Memory bus is dual-channel for AMD versus single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s for AMD versus 59.7 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory support is present on AMD, absent on Intel. PCIe is Gen 5 with 24 lanes for AMD versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are absent on AMD, present as Intel Xe3 Graphics on Intel. The multiplier is unlocked on AMD, locked on Intel. Market segment is desktop for AMD, mobile for Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins every recorded head-to-head test, but the margins vary widely by workload type. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the AMD score of 21,765 beats the Intel score of 5,263 by 313.5%. This is the single biggest delta in the dataset and reflects the combined effects of more cores, more threads, higher clocks, and a larger L3 cache. PassMark integer math shows a 203.3% advantage for AMD, with scores of 74,745 versus 24,640. PassMark find prime numbers shows a 180.9% advantage, 191 versus 68. PassMark random string sorting shows a 156.9% advantage, 35,096 versus 13,659. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 158.3% advantage, 2,193 versus 849. PassMark data compression shows a 152.7% advantage, 289,999 versus 114,775. PassMark extended instructions shows a 124.5% advantage, 21,747 versus 9,686. PassMark multi-thread shows a 120.6% advantage, 25,645 versus 11,625. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 119.7% advantage, 9,141 versus 4,160. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 119.8% advantage, 1,290 versus 587.

The gaps narrow considerably in single-threaded and floating-point workloads. Cinebench R15 single-core gives AMD a 17% advantage, 309 versus 264. Cinebench R23 single-core gives AMD a 74.1% advantage, 3,072 versus 1,765. PassMark floating point math gives AMD a 54.1% advantage, 45,799 versus 29,722. PassMark data encryption gives AMD a 96.6% advantage, 16,712 versus 8,501. PassMark physics gives AMD a 91.2% advantage, 1,660 versus 868. The closest result in the entire dataset is PassMark single-thread, where AMD scores 3,689 and Intel scores 3,614, a 2.1% difference. This shows that the Intel Core 3 304's single-core architecture is competitive with the AMD part when thread count is irrelevant, despite being far behind in multi-core scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins in every benchmark category recorded. Its advantages are largest in multi-threaded rendering workloads, as shown by the 313.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and the 119.7% lead in Cinebench R20 multi-core. Content creation tasks that scale across cores, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation, will see the greatest benefit from the AMD processor. The PassMark integer math result, at 203.3% ahead, indicates a strong advantage in general computation and data processing. The 152.7% lead in data compression and 156.9% lead in random string sorting point to productivity workloads that handle large files or databases. The 96.6% lead in data encryption favors the AMD processor for security-related tasks. The 180.9% lead in prime number finding suggests an advantage in scientific and mathematical workloads.

The Intel Core 3 304 has no benchmark wins in the dataset, but its closest result reveals where it is least disadvantaged. The 2.1% gap in PassMark single-thread shows that in lightly threaded applications, the Intel part is nearly equivalent to the AMD chip. The 17% gap in Cinebench R15 single-core and the 54.1% gap in floating-point math are the other relatively close margins. The Intel processor's 15 W TDP and mobile BGA 1516 socket also indicate its intended role in low-power laptops and compact systems. Its integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics means it can run without a discrete GPU, which the AMD processor cannot. The Intel part's support for LPDDR5X memory is suited to mobile designs where power efficiency matters. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy: the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is the stronger processor in every measured workload, while the Intel Core 3 304 is a low-power mobile option whose closest competitive area is single-threaded efficiency. The 83rd percentile ranking for AMD versus the 68th percentile for Intel reinforces the overall performance gap. The average benchmark scores of 32,750 versus 13,745 summarize the separation: the AMD processor delivers more than double the average performance of the Intel part across the full test suite.