AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS, which claims 14 of the 17 recorded wins against the Intel Core 3 305. The scale of the AMD processor's advantage in heavily threaded workloads is the defining feature of this comparison. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 24,565 against Intel's 13,123, a delta of 87.2% in favor of the Ryzen. This pattern repeats across the entire Cinebench suite: R15 multi-core shows a 87.3% gap (2,476 versus 1,322), R20 multi-core a 87.2% gap (10,317 versus 5,511), and R15 single-core a 87.6% gap (349 versus 186). The single-core deltas are just as large as the multi-core ones in Cinebench, indicating the AMD architecture holds a commanding lead in per-thread performance as well.

The Passmark suite reinforces this dominance, with the most extreme deltas appearing in integer math. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS scores 97,625 in Passmark integer math, which is 202.3% ahead of the Intel Core 3 305's 32,295. Data compression shows a 134.2% delta (343,952 versus 146,857), and random string sorting a 137.6% delta (41,867 versus 17,623). Floating point math is also far ahead for AMD, with a 39.4% advantage (58,965 versus 42,284). The Ryzen also wins the remaining workloads: data encryption by 85.9% (20,487 versus 11,019), extended instructions by 87.8% (25,434 versus 13,543), multithread by 85.1% (28,572 versus 15,439), and physics by a narrower 12.7% (1,389 versus 1,233).

The Intel Core 3 305 does secure three wins, all in Passmark tests. The most notable is find prime numbers, where Intel leads by 24.3% (115 versus 87). The other two Intel victories are in the single-thread and singlethread Passmark tests, both recording a score of 3,977 against AMD's 3,762, a 5.4% edge. This suggests Intel's implementation has a specific strength in certain scalar integer workloads and a modest advantage in the Passmark single-thread metric, even though the Cinebench single-core results tell the opposite story with AMD ahead by over 87%. The overall average benchmark score for the AMD processor is 39,325, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part averages 18,302 and sits in the 72nd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, and is part of the 8000 series. It uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC, integrating 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with a 3 nm process node from Intel's own foundry. The Intel part does not list a transistor count or die size in the database.

The core and cache layouts diverge sharply. AMD provides 8 physical cores with 16 threads via simultaneous multithreading, while Intel offers 6 cores and 6 threads with no multithreading. AMD's cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel's cache structure is reported differently: 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The memory subsystem also differs. AMD supports dual-channel DDR5 with a peak bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only on a single-channel bus, capping bandwidth at 59.7 GB/s. AMD also enables ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity favors AMD as well, with Gen 4 support across 20 CPU lanes versus Intel's Gen 4 across 6 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics solutions are distinct: AMD uses the Radeon 780M, while Intel fields Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. Both processors are locked (multiplier not unlocked) and target the mobile market segment. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP7 with part numbers for both FP7r2 and FP7 variants, while Intel uses BGA 1516 with the part number SAE3L. The AMD processor was released in April 2024, and the Intel processor's release date is listed as April 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has an average benchmark score of 39,325, which is more than double the Intel Core 3 305's 18,302. The AMD part sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while Intel is in the 72nd percentile.

Q: Are there any workloads where the Intel Core 3 305 wins?

A: Yes, the Intel part wins three tests: Passmark find prime numbers by 24.3% (115 versus 87) and the Passmark single-thread test by 5.4% (3,977 versus 3,762), which is recorded under two test names in the database.

Q: How do the core counts and threading capabilities compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD part benefits from simultaneous multithreading, which the Intel part lacks entirely.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: AMD supports dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but on a single-channel bus, resulting in 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. AMD also supports ECC memory, which Intel does not.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare for the AMD processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4245P at 0.3% lower average score, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 at 0.4% higher, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS at 0.7% higher, and the Intel Core i7-13700F at 0.8% lower.

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 305 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 3 305's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-14100 at 0.1% higher average score, the Intel Core 5 330 at 0.2% higher, the Intel Core 7 360 at 0.4% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 0.4% lower.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS and the Intel Core 3 305:

• Cores: AMD 8, Intel 6
• Threads: AMD 16, Intel 6
• Base Clock: AMD 3.80 GHz, Intel 1.50 GHz
• Boost Clock: AMD 5.10 GHz, Intel 4.30 GHz
• TDP: AMD 45 W, Intel 15 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FP7, Intel BGA 1516
• Architecture: AMD Zen 4, Intel not listed
• Codename: AMD Hawk Point, Intel Wildcat Lake
• Process Node: AMD 4 nm (TSMC), Intel 3 nm (Intel)
• Transistors: AMD 25,000 million, Intel not listed
• Die Size: AMD 178 mm², Intel not listed
• L1 Cache: AMD 64 KB per core, Intel 192 KB total
• L2 Cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 2.5 MB
• L3 Cache: AMD 16 MB shared, Intel 6 MB shared
• Memory Support: AMD DDR5, Intel DDR5 and LPDDR5X
• Memory Bus: AMD Dual-channel, Intel Single-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: AMD 89.6 GB/s, Intel 59.7 GB/s
• ECC Memory: AMD supported, Intel not supported
• PCIe: AMD Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only), Intel Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated Graphics: AMD Radeon 780M, Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe)
• Release Date: AMD 2024-04-15, Intel 2026-04-15
• Launch MSRP: AMD not listed, Intel $309
• Part Number: AMD 100-000001316(FP7r2),100-000001387(FP7), Intel SAE3L

The Verdict

The recorded data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is the superior processor for nearly all computational tasks. Its 87% plus advantages across every Cinebench test, both single-core and multi-core, demonstrate a generational gap in raw performance. The Passmark integer math result, where AMD leads by 202.3%, highlights the efficiency of the Zen 4 architecture in general-purpose compute. The AMD part also delivers more than double the average benchmark score of the Intel part (39,325 versus 18,302) and sits 14 percentile points higher in the global CPU ranking.

The Intel Core 3 305 is not without merit. Its 15 W TDP, compared to AMD's 45 W, makes it a much lower-power option for thin-and-light mobile designs. The single-thread Passmark win of 5.4% and the find prime numbers win of 24.3% show that Intel's Wildcat Lake implementation has specific strengths in certain scalar workloads. However, these wins are narrow in scope and do not offset the massive deficits elsewhere. The Intel part also supports LPDDR5X memory, which AMD does not, and its smaller cache sizes and single-channel memory bus (59.7 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s) limit its memory-bound performance.

For workloads that depend on multi-threaded throughput, content creation, data compression, encryption, or floating-point math, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is the clear choice based on the benchmark evidence. The Intel Core 3 305 is suitable only for scenarios where its lower power draw and specific single-thread integer strengths are the primary considerations, and even then, the AMD part's Cinebench single-core results suggest a more balanced overall performer. The database records 14 wins for AMD and 3 for Intel, a margin that leaves little ambiguity for most use cases.