AMD Ryzen 7 2700 vs Intel Core i3-10305 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 and Intel Core i3-10305 occupy different tiers of the desktop CPU market, yet their average benchmark scores place them within striking distance of each other. The Ryzen 7 2700 achieves an average benchmark score of 2320, while the Core i3-10305 scores 2264, a difference of roughly 2.5%. This proximity in overall performance masks significant architectural and workload-specific divergences, which the benchmark data clarifies.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 features 8 cores and 16 threads, double the 4 cores and 8 threads of the Intel Core i3-10305.

Q: How do their single-core benchmark scores compare?

A: In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen 7 2700 scores 161, while the Core i3-10305 scores 111. This gives AMD a 45% lead in this specific test.

Q: What is the difference in their Cinebench R15 multi-core scores?

A: The Ryzen 7 2700 scores 1551, and the Core i3-10305 scores 788. The AMD processor is 96.8% faster, representing a nearly double performance advantage.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 memory with a dual-channel memory bus. However, the Ryzen 7 2700 has a higher theoretical memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s compared to the Core i3-10305's 42.7 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i3-10305 has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, whereas the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 has a boost clock of 4.10 GHz.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-10305 includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 630. The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 does not have integrated graphics.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 is built on a 12 nm process by GlobalFoundries, using the Zen architecture with the codename Zen (specifically Zen+ Pinnacle Ridge). It packs 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel Core i3-10305, by contrast, uses Intel's 14 nm process with the Comet Lake architecture (Comet Lake-R), and its transistor count and die size are not disclosed in the available data.

Core configuration is the most stark architectural contrast. The Ryzen 7 2700 offers 8 physical cores and 16 threads, making it a high-throughput part. The Core i3-10305 provides only 4 cores and 8 threads. This difference directly impacts multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by the benchmark scores. Cache hierarchy also differs significantly. The Ryzen 7 2700 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 16 MB L3 cache. The Core i3-10305 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a smaller shared 8 MB L3 cache.

Clock speeds favor Intel in raw frequency. The Core i3-10305 has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Ryzen 7 2700 operates at a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. Despite this clock disadvantage, the Ryzen 7 2700 leads in the available benchmark comparisons, suggesting that its additional cores and larger cache compensate for the lower frequencies. The Intel part is also multiplier-locked, while the AMD part has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Both processors use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, but they are on incompatible sockets: AMD Socket AM4 versus Intel Socket 1200. Neither supports ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data provides two direct comparisons, both in Cinebench R15. The results are decisively in favor of the AMD Ryzen 7 2700. In the multi-core test, the Ryzen 7 2700 scores 1551, while the Core i3-10305 scores 788. This yields a delta of 96.8%, meaning the AMD processor is almost exactly twice as fast in this threaded workload. The reason is evident from the specifications: the Ryzen 7 2700 has twice the cores and threads, and its shared L3 cache is double the size at 16 MB versus 8 MB.

The single-core test also favors AMD, but by a smaller margin. The Ryzen 7 2700 scores 161, and the Core i3-10305 scores 111, a delta of 45%. This result is counterintuitive given the Intel chip's higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus 4.10 GHz. The data suggests that the Zen architecture's per-core efficiency, or the benchmark's specific characteristics, gives the Ryzen 7 2700 an edge even when the thread count is irrelevant. It is important to note that the Core i3-10305 has additional benchmark scores in Cinebench R20 and R23 that are not available for the Ryzen 7 2700. In Cinebench R20, the Core i3-10305 scores 3287 multi-core and 464 single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 7828 multi-core and 1105 single-core. These scores cannot be directly compared to the Ryzen 7 2700, but they establish a baseline for the Intel part's performance in newer test versions.

The overall win count in the head-to-head comparisons is 2 wins for the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 and 0 for the Intel Core i3-10305. This is consistent with the average benchmark scores, where the Ryzen 7 2700 sits at 2320 versus 2264. The Ryzen 7 2700's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2134 (avg score 2319, delta 0%), Intel Core i7-8809G (2307, 0.6%), and Intel Core i5-10400H (2303, 0.7%). The Core i3-10305's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-1068NG7 (2259, 0.2%), Intel Core i5-9400 (2254, 0.4%), and Intel Core i7-10710U (2248, 0.7%). This contextualizes both processors as mid-pack performers, with the Ryzen 7 2700 ranking at the 48th percentile of all CPUs and the Core i3-10305 at the 47th percentile.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specification differences between the two processors, based solely on the provided data.

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 2700 | Intel Core i3-10305 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 4 |

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.10 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| Architecture | Zen (Zen+ Pinnacle Ridge) | Comet Lake (Comet Lake-R) |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,800 million | Not specified |

| Die Size | 213 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2018-04-18 | 2021-03-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $299 | Not specified |

| Part Number | YD2700BBM88AF | SRH3K |

Additional differences are present but not quantifiable in the spec table. The Ryzen 7 2700's generation is listed as "Ryzen 7 (Zen+ (Pinnacle Ridge))", while the Core i3-10305 is "Core i3 (Comet Lake)". The Intel part's production status is Active, as is the AMD part. Both support DDR4 memory and use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Neither supports ECC memory.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear picture: the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 is the superior processor in the tested workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it is 96.8% faster than the Intel Core i3-10305. In single-core, it is 45% faster. These are substantial margins, and they directly contradict any expectation that the Intel part's higher clock speeds would translate to performance wins. The Ryzen 7 2700's advantage stems from its core count, thread count, and larger cache hierarchy.

For users running heavily threaded applications—such as video rendering, software compilation, or scientific computing—the Ryzen 7 2700 is the obvious choice. Its 8 cores and 16 threads provide the parallelism needed to handle such tasks, and the benchmark results confirm this capability. The Core i3-10305, with only 4 cores and 8 threads, will lag significantly in these scenarios. The data shows no workload in which the Core i3-10305 wins.

However, the Core i3-10305 has some redeeming qualities that the benchmark scores do not capture. It includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, which the Ryzen 7 2700 lacks entirely. This makes the Intel part viable for a system without a discrete graphics card. The Core i3-10305 also has a higher base clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.20 GHz) and boost clock (4.50 GHz vs 4.10 GHz), which might offer better responsiveness in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks, though the single-core benchmark results do not support this conclusion. Additionally, the Core i3-10305 is a newer release, dating from 2021 versus 2018 for the Ryzen 7 2700.

The verdict from the performance data is straightforward. The AMD Ryzen 7 2700 is the better CPU for anyone prioritizing raw compute throughput. Its 96.8% multi-core lead is decisive, and it also wins the single-core comparison. The Intel Core i3-10305 is only preferable in a niche scenario where integrated graphics are required, or where the platform specifics of Socket 1200 are mandated. In general-purpose desktop use, the Ryzen 7 2700's performance profile makes it the stronger recommendation. The average benchmark scores, with the Ryzen 7 2700 at 2320 and the Core i3-10305 at 2264, reinforce this assessment. The data does not support any performance-based argument for selecting the Intel part.