AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How large is the performance gap between the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and the Intel Core 3 305?

A: The AMD processor wins all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its average benchmark score is 39,768, while the Intel chip averages 18,302. The largest single delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where AMD leads by 267.8%.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score?

A: The Ryzen 7 9800X3D delivers a PassMark single-thread score of 4,430 versus 3,977 for the Core 3 305, a lead of 11.4%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the margin is 2,080 versus 1,852, a 12.3% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in multi-threaded performance?

A: The Ryzen 7 9800X3D scores 23,230 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 77% higher than the Core 3 305's 13,123. In PassMark multithread, the gap is 40,009 versus 15,439, a 159.1% difference.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The AMD chip supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has 96 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, a 16-fold difference in favor of AMD.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive outcome. The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D outperforms the Intel Core 3 305 in every recorded benchmark, with zero wins for the Intel part across 15 head-to-head tests. The AMD processor sits in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel chip ranks in the 72nd percentile. That 15-point percentile gap reflects a processor designed for entirely different workloads and power envelopes.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the choice for users who need maximum throughput in heavily threaded applications. Its 16 threads, 96 MB L3 cache, and 120 TDP deliver multi-core scores that are 77% higher in Cinebench R23 and 159.1% higher in PassMark multithread compared to the Core 3 305. The AMD part also leads single-thread performance, which means it wins in lightly threaded workloads, not just parallel tasks.

The Intel Core 3 305 targets a different segment entirely. Its 15 TDP, single-channel memory, and 6 threads position it for low-power mobile systems where battery life and thermals take priority over raw performance. Its 3 nm process node from Intel and compact design make it suitable for thin-and-light devices, but the benchmark data shows it sacrifices significant compute capability to achieve that efficiency. The Core 3 305 also comes with a launch MSRP of $309, while the Ryzen 7 9800X3D has a launch MSRP of $479, but the performance delta far exceeds the price delta.

For gamers and content creators running desktop workloads, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the clear pick. For portable devices where 15 watts is the ceiling, the Core 3 305 fills that role, though users should expect roughly half the multi-threaded performance of the AMD part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D wins every head-to-head comparison, but the margins vary widely by workload type. The largest lead appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where AMD scores 423 versus Intel's 115, a 267.8% advantage. This workload benefits from the AMD chip's combination of high clock speeds and large cache, which reduces memory latency during iterative calculations.

PassMark integer math shows a similar pattern: AMD scores 116,709 against Intel's 32,295, a 261.4% delta. This test is highly dependent on core count and per-core efficiency, and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D has both advantages with 8 cores versus 6 and higher boost clocks. PassMark physics also shows a large gap at 231.1%, with AMD at 4,083 and Intel at 1,233, reflecting the AMD part's stronger floating-point and thread scheduling capabilities.

Data compression favors AMD by 218.7% (468,017 versus 146,857), a workload that scales with both cache size and memory bandwidth. The 96 MB L3 cache and dual-channel 89.6 GB/s memory bus give the Ryzen 7 9800X3D a structural edge over the Intel chip's 6 MB L3 and 59.7 GB/s single-channel bandwidth. Extended instructions show a 186.6% gap (38,808 versus 13,543), indicating that the AMD architecture handles AVX-class workloads with considerably more headroom.

Random string sorting, which tests memory latency and pointer-chasing performance, delivers a 175.4% lead (48,526 versus 17,623). Cinebench R15 multi-core follows at 175.9% (3,647 versus 1,322), while PassMark multithread shows 159.1% (40,009 versus 15,439). These multi-threaded tests all point to the same conclusion: the Ryzen 7 9800X3D provides roughly 2.5 to 3 times the parallel throughput of the Core 3 305.

The smallest margins appear in single-threaded tests. PassMark single-thread shows 4,430 versus 3,977, an 11.4% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,080 versus 1,852, a 12.3% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 328 versus 186, a 76.3% gap, which is larger than the other single-thread tests but still the narrowest category of comparison. Data encryption shows a 101.1% delta (22,158 versus 11,019), and floating-point math shows 87.9% (79,456 versus 42,284), both moderate wins for AMD.

Specification Differences

The two processors occupy different market segments, which is reflected in their core specifications. The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a desktop part with 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 is a mobile part with 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD chip has a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel chip has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, meaning it relies on turbo frequencies to reach competitive performance.

Thermal design power differs by a factor of eight: 120 watts for AMD versus 15 watts for Intel. This explains the Core 3 305's lower sustained performance in multi-threaded tests, as it cannot maintain high clocks under full load without exceeding its power budget. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D uses an AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, indicating a soldered mobile design.

Memory support diverges significantly. The AMD part uses DDR5 with dual-channel access and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only with a single-channel bus, capping bandwidth at 59.7 GB/s. AMD enables ECC memory support; Intel does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes, a substantial reduction in expansion capability.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD includes Radeon Graphics, while Intel includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The Intel part has a higher L1 cache at 192 KB versus 80 KB per core for AMD, and a higher L2 cache at 2.5 MB versus 1 MB per core, but the AMD part dominates L3 cache with 96 MB versus 6 MB. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel part does not. AMD's production status is active with a release date of 2024-11-06, while Intel's release date is 2026-04-15.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D uses Zen 5 architecture on the Granite Ridge codename, built on a 4 nm process from TSMC. It contains 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. The Intel Core 3 305 uses Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with transistor count and die size not recorded in the database.

The cache hierarchy reflects different design philosophies. AMD allocates 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, then pools 96 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 is the defining feature of the 9800X3D, providing a massive staging area for data reuse in gaming and data-dense workloads. Intel's Core 3 305 uses 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2, with only 6 MB of shared L3, which is typical for a low-power mobile chip but limits performance in cache-sensitive tasks.

The core count difference (8 versus 6) is compounded by thread count (16 versus 6). The AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading to double its logical thread count, while the Intel part runs one thread per core. This explains why multi-threaded benchmarks show such large deltas: the AMD chip has more physical cores, more logical threads, higher clocks, and a much larger cache.

The process node difference (4 nm TSMC versus 3 nm Intel) is offset by the power envelope. The 3 nm Intel process allows the Core 3 305 to operate at 15 watts, but the 120-watt AMD part uses its additional power budget to sustain high clocks across all cores. The Zen 5 architecture in the AMD chip delivers higher instructions per clock in single-threaded tests, as shown by the 12.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core despite the Intel part's higher L1 and L2 caches.

Memory architecture also differs. AMD uses a dual-channel DDR5 controller with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses a single-channel controller with 59.7 GB/s. This 50% bandwidth deficit in the Intel part directly impacts data-compression, encryption, and sorting benchmarks, all of which show between 101.1% and 218.7% deltas in favor of AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D wins in every benchmark category recorded, but the degree of dominance varies by workload type. For multi-threaded compute tasks, the AMD part is the clear winner. Cinebench R23 multi-core at 23,230 versus 13,123, PassMark multithread at 40,009 versus 15,439, and Cinebench R15 multi-core at 3,647 versus 1,322 all confirm that the 9800X3D delivers between 77% and 175.9% more performance in parallel workloads.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the AMD chip also wins, but by a smaller margin. PassMark single-thread at 4,430 versus 3,977 (11.4%) and Cinebench R23 single-core at 2,080 versus 1,852 (12.3%) show that the Intel part is competitive in lightly threaded tasks, though it still trails. The AMD chip wins all such tests, but users upgrading from a similar Intel part would notice a modest improvement in single-thread performance.

For memory-intensive workloads, the AMD chip wins by the largest margins. PassMark data compression at 468,017 versus 146,857 (218.7%) and random string sorting at 48,526 versus 17,623 (175.4%) benefit directly from the 96 MB L3 cache and dual-channel memory. The Intel part's 6 MB L3 and single-channel bus create a bottleneck that the 3 nm process cannot overcome.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins in none of the recorded benchmarks, but the data shows it holds its own in single-thread tests where the delta drops to 11.4%. Its 15-watt TDP and LPDDR5X support make it suited for fanless or low-power mobile designs, but the benchmark data shows that users of such systems will accept roughly half the multi-threaded performance of the AMD desktop part. The Intel chip's 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes and single-channel memory limit its expansion and bandwidth capabilities, reinforcing its role as an entry-level mobile processor rather than a performance part.