AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core 3 305: Mobile processor comparison with benchmark data for 8-core Zen 4 versus 6-core Wildcat Lake designs, including Cinebench and PassMark results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records 15 shared tests between these two mobile processors, with the AMD Ryzen 7 250 taking 10 wins and the Intel Core 3 305 taking 5. The magnitude of those victories, however, is heavily skewed toward the AMD part.

The largest single gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the Ryzen 7 250 scores 91,565 against 32,295 for the Core 3 305, a delta of 183.5%. That is the only test in the entire set with a triple-digit percentage difference. Data compression also shows a massive divide: 300,708 versus 146,857, a 104.8% advantage. Random string sorting follows a similar pattern at 103.5% (35,861 versus 17,623). These three workloads, all heavily dependent on parallel execution and memory throughput, illustrate the structural advantage of the AMD processor's 8 cores and 16 threads versus the Intel's 6 cores and 6 threads.

Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 74.1% lead for AMD (2,302 versus 1,322). PassMark multithread shows a 62.5% lead (25,089 versus 15,439). Data encryption shows a 60.3% lead (17,661 versus 11,019). Extended instructions show a 59.6% lead (21,613 versus 13,543). Floating point math is closer but still decisively AMD: 53,285 versus 42,284, a 26% difference.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins the single-thread efficiency battle. PassMark single thread records 3,977 for Intel against 3,678 for AMD, a 7.5% edge. Cinebench R23 single core also favors Intel: 1,852 versus 1,715, a 7.4% advantage. In Cinebench R15 single core, AMD wins by 44.6% (269 versus 186), but that test is an older workload and the gap is less representative of modern single-thread performance. Intel also wins PassMark find prime numbers (115 versus 73, a 36.5% edge) and PassMark physics (1,233 versus 1,147, a 7% edge).

The overall average benchmark score tells a similar story: AMD sits at 38,221, placing in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Intel sits at 18,302, placing in the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals list shows that AMD's average score is roughly equal to the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (38,194, delta 0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-13600HX (38,261, delta -0.1%). The Intel Core 3 305, by contrast, matches the Intel Core i3-14100 (18,318, delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core 5 330 (18,345, delta -0.2%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall benchmark average?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 records an average benchmark score of 38,221, while the Intel Core 3 305 records 18,302. The AMD part sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, the Intel part in the 72nd.

Q: Where does the Intel Core 3 305 actually beat the AMD Ryzen 7 250?

A: Intel wins in single-threaded workloads. PassMark single thread shows 3,977 versus 3,678 (7.5% higher), and Cinebench R23 single core shows 1,852 versus 1,715 (7.4% higher). Intel also leads in PassMark physics (1,233 versus 1,147) and PassMark find prime numbers (115 versus 73).

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The largest multi-core gap is in PassMark integer math at 183.5% in favor of AMD. Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 74.1% AMD advantage, and PassMark multithread shows a 62.5% AMD advantage. Cinebench R23 multicore is the closest multi-core test, with AMD ahead by only 11.8% (14,676 versus 13,123).

Q: What memory configurations do these processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the production status and release timing?

A: Both are listed as Active. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a release date of 2025-01-05. The Intel Core 3 305 has a release date of 2026-04-15. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $309.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is built on Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process from Intel. Transistor count and die size are not recorded for the Intel part.

The core configurations diverge sharply. AMD provides 8 cores with 16 threads, while Intel provides 6 cores with 6 threads. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel part has a much lower base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The thermal design power also differs: AMD is rated at 28 W, Intel at 15 W.

Cache layouts are distinct. The AMD processor uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor uses 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part also has a higher memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5, versus 59.7 GB/s over single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X for Intel.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core 3 305 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Both support PCIe Gen 4, but the lane count is more than three times higher on the AMD side.

Integrated graphics also differ. AMD uses the Radeon 780M. Intel uses the Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. Neither processor has unlocked multipliers, and neither supports ECC memory.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear division of roles. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the stronger processor for multi-threaded and memory-intensive workloads. Its 8 cores with 16 threads, dual-channel memory, and higher bandwidth deliver leads of 183.5% in integer math, 104.8% in data compression, and 74.1% in Cinebench R15 multicore. It also holds a 62.5% advantage in PassMark multithread and a 60.3% advantage in data encryption. The overall average benchmark score of 38,221 places it in the 86th percentile, with direct rivals including the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T and the Intel Core i5-13600HX, both within 0.2% of its average.

The Intel Core 3 305 is the better choice for single-threaded responsiveness and lower power draw. It wins PassMark single thread by 7.5% and Cinebench R23 single core by 7.4%. Its 15 W TDP is substantially lower than the AMD's 28 W rating. The 6 MB shared L3 cache and 6 cores with 6 threads are enough for light parallel tasks, but the 59.7 GB/s single-channel memory bandwidth and 6 PCIe lanes limit expansion and memory-bound performance.

For users who need sustained multi-threaded throughput, data compression, encryption, or heavy floating point math, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the clear pick from this data. For users who prioritize single-thread speed, lower power, and a newer process node (3 nm versus 4 nm), the Intel Core 3 305 has a legitimate claim, though its overall average score of 18,302 places it far below the AMD part in the 72nd percentile. The Intel part also carries a launch MSRP of $309, a fact recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 250 | Intel Core 3 305 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | Not recorded |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB total |

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

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $309 |

| Part Number | 100-000001722 | SAE3L |