AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G and Intel Core 3 305 target very different platforms and use cases, and the benchmark data reflects that split clearly. The Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop processor built on AMD's Zen 3 architecture for the AM4 socket, while the Intel Core 3 305 is a 6-core, 6-thread mobile chip on Intel's Wildcat Lake architecture for a BGA socket. In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD part wins 12 of 17 tests, while the Intel part wins 5. The average benchmark score for the AMD chip is 28032, placing it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs, whereas the Intel chip averages 18302 and sits in the 72nd percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads for parallel workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G supports 12 threads, double the 6 threads of the Intel Core 3 305. This directly contributes to its large multi-core benchmark advantages.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: In the PassMark integer math test, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G scores 67561 against 32295 for the Intel Core 3 305, a 109.2% advantage for the AMD processor.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 305 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 5 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. Its most notable wins are in PassMark physics (1233 vs 686, a 44.4% margin) and PassMark single-thread performance (3977 vs 3241, an 18.5% margin).

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G scores 17249, while the Intel Core 3 305 scores 13123. This gives the AMD chip a 31.4% lead in that test.

Q: What memory technologies does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus, while the Intel Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, which is slightly higher than the Intel Core 3 305's 4.30 GHz boost clock.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and target segments. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G uses the Zen 3 architecture with the Cezanne codename, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It incorporates 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on Intel's 3 nm process. The transistor count and die size for the Intel part are not recorded in the database.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD chip allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with a 16 MB L3 cache. The Intel chip reports 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's larger L3 cache, combined with simultaneous multithreading, gives it a structural advantage in workloads that scale with cache capacity and thread count.

Socket and platform support are entirely distinct. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G fits AMD Socket AM4, a desktop platform, while the Intel Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, indicating a soldered mobile design. The AMD processor supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. The Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, but it does not support ECC memory. The Intel part has higher raw memory bandwidth despite the single-channel bus, which may help in memory-sensitive tasks.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD processor provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Intel chip's newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the AMD chip offers far more lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part uses Radeon Vega 7, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by workload type. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G is the stronger processor for multi-threaded and integer-heavy workloads. Its 12 threads, larger 16 MB L3 cache, and 31.4% to 31.7% advantages across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests make it the choice for rendering, compilation, and data processing. Its 109.2% lead in integer math and 74.1% lead in data compression reinforce this.

The Intel Core 3 305 is the better option for specific single-threaded and physics-based tasks. Its 18.5% win in PassMark single-thread and 44.4% win in PassMark physics indicate strengths in lightly threaded, latency-sensitive applications. Its 8.6% lead in floating-point math also shows competence in numerical workloads that do not scale with core count.

For buyers on a desktop AM4 platform, the AMD chip is the clear choice given its higher average benchmark score (28032 vs 18302) and 80th percentile ranking. For mobile or embedded systems where the Intel BGA socket is required, the Intel chip provides competitive single-thread performance and lower power consumption at 15 W TDP, but its multi-threaded performance lags significantly behind the AMD part's 65 W TDP desktop design. The Intel Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G | Intel Core 3 305 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 6 |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.90 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.40 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 10,700 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 180 mm² | Not recorded |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 16 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 7 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G dominates the Cinebench suite entirely. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1738 against 1322, a 31.5% win. In R15 single-core, it scores 245 against 186, a 31.7% win. The pattern holds for R20 multi-core (7244 vs 5511, 31.4%), R20 single-core (1022 vs 777, 31.5%), R23 multi-core (17249 vs 13123, 31.4%), and R23 single-core (2435 vs 1852, 31.5%). These consistent margins indicate a uniform performance advantage across rendering generation and scaling.

The PassMark suite shows a more mixed picture. The AMD chip wins data compression decisively with 255608 against 146857, a 74.1% margin. Data encryption goes to AMD at 15253 vs 11019, a 38.4% win. Extended instructions favor AMD at 17944 vs 13543, a 32.5% margin. Integer math is the largest single gap: AMD scores 67561, Intel scores 32295, giving AMD a 109.2% advantage. Multithread performance favors AMD at 19129 vs 15439, a 23.9% win. Random string sorting also goes to AMD at 25253 vs 17623, a 43.3% margin.

The Intel Core 3 305 takes the remaining tests. Its largest win is in find prime numbers, where it scores 115 against AMD's 49, a 57.4% margin in Intel's favor. Physics shows Intel at 1233 vs 686, a 44.4% win. Floating-point math goes to Intel at 42284 vs 38649, an 8.6% margin. Single-thread performance, recorded twice as passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, shows Intel at 3977 against AMD's 3241, an 18.5% win in both entries.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655G wins in all multi-threaded, integer, and data-processing scenarios. Its 12 threads and 16 MB L3 cache drive wins in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 across both multi-core and single-core variants, with margins consistently around 31.5%. It is particularly strong in integer math, where its 67561 score is more than double the Intel chip's 32295. Data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, multithread tests, and random string sorting all favor the AMD chip by margins ranging from 23.9% to 74.1%. This makes it the appropriate processor for render farms, code compilation, database operations, and any workload that uses more than six threads.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins in five specific areas. Its physics score of 1233 against 686 indicates a 44.4% advantage in physics simulation, likely benefiting from higher per-core efficiency in that workload. Its find prime numbers score of 115 against 49 shows a 57.4% lead in prime-number calculation, a latency-sensitive task. Floating-point math goes to Intel at 42284 vs 38649, an 8.6% margin. Single-thread performance at 3977 vs 3241, an 18.5% lead, makes it the better chip for lightly threaded applications that depend on one core's speed. The Intel chip's 15 W TDP, versus AMD's 65 W, also indicates significantly lower power draw, although the database does not provide efficiency metrics to quantify the trade-off.