AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX and the Intel Core 3 305 is decisively lopsided, but not entirely one-directional. The AMD part wins 10 of the 13 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel part takes 3. The wins, however, occupy very different performance domains.

The Ryzen 9 7940HX dominates every multi-threaded and throughput-oriented workload in the database. Its largest margins come in integer math, where it scores 202,883 against 32,295 for the Intel part, a 528.2% advantage. Data compression shows a 372.4% lead (693,741 vs. 146,857), and random string sorting shows a 364% lead (81,775 vs. 17,623). These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamentally different class of compute capability for parallel workloads.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins exclusively in single-threaded tests. It takes the Cinebench R23 single-core test with 1,852 vs. 1,807, a modest 2.4% edge. It also wins the PassMark single-thread test with 3,977 vs. 3,942, a 0.9% margin. These are the only two distinct tests where Intel comes out ahead (the duplicate PassMark singlethread entry counts as the same result).

The use-case split is therefore clear. The Ryzen 9 7940HX is built for rendering, compilation, data processing, encryption, and any workload that scales with core count. The Core 3 305 is competitive only in lightly threaded, latency-sensitive tasks where a single core's efficiency matters more than raw throughput.

Looking at the broader database context, the Ryzen 9 7940HX sits at the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 69,875. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69,996, 0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70,163, 0.4% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X (69,515, 0.5% behind). The Core 3 305, by contrast, sits at the 72nd percentile with an average score of 18,302, placing it near the Intel Core i3-14100 (18,318, 0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core 5 330 (18,345, 0.2% ahead).

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is the superior processor for anyone whose workloads are multi-threaded, and the Intel Core 3 305 is the better choice only for single-thread-dominated tasks where its slight clock-for-clock efficiency gives it a narrow edge.

For content creation, scientific computing, virtualization, or any workload that can utilize more than a few threads, the Ryzen 9 7940HX delivers between 86.3% and 528.2% higher scores across the PassMark suite. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result alone shows a 124% advantage (29,400 vs. 13,123). That is not a close contest; it is a generational and architectural gap.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins the single-thread contests by margins of 2.4% and 0.9% respectively. These are real but small. In everyday use, that translates to a negligible difference in single-thread responsiveness. The Ryzen 9 7940HX also holds a single-thread score of 3,942 in PassMark, only 0.9% behind Intel's 3,977, meaning the AMD part is nearly as fast in the exact area where Intel wins.

There is also the matter of platform capability. The Ryzen 9 7940HX supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. That bandwidth difference compounds the multi-threaded gap in memory-sensitive workloads. The AMD part also offers PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes for Intel.

The Verdict: choose the Ryzen 9 7940HX unless the use case is strictly single-threaded and power consumption is the primary constraint. The Core 3 305 has a 15 W TDP versus 55 W for the AMD part, which makes it far more suitable for fanless or ultra-portable designs. But for raw performance, the Ryzen 9 7940HX is the clear winner in 10 of 13 categories.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the entire comparison is PassMark integer math, where the Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 202,883 against 32,295, a 528.2% advantage. This test measures ALU throughput, and the 16-core, 32-thread Zen 4 design simply overwhelms the 6-core, 6-thread Intel part.

Data compression shows a 372.4% lead for AMD (693,741 vs. 146,857). This workload benefits from the Ryzen's 64 MB of L3 cache and dual-channel memory bandwidth. The Intel part's 6 MB shared L3 and single-channel memory controller cannot feed the compression engine at the same rate.

Random string sorting follows with a 364% margin (81,775 vs. 17,623). Encryption shows a 280.9% lead (41,974 vs. 11,019), and extended instructions show a 276.8% lead (51,029 vs. 13,543). These are all deeply parallel workloads where core count and memory bandwidth dominate.

The Ryzen 9 7940HX also leads in PassMark multi-thread by 244.6% (53,204 vs. 15,439), in floating-point math by 187.1% (121,383 vs. 42,284), and in prime number finding by 137.4% (273 vs. 115). The physics test shows the smallest AMD win among the PassMark suite at 86.3% (2,297 vs. 1,233).

Cinebench R23 multi-core confirms the pattern with a 124% advantage (29,400 vs. 13,123). This is the most commonly cited render benchmark, and the gap is substantial enough to translate into roughly half the render time for a given scene.

The Intel wins are narrow. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 1,852 versus AMD's 1,807, a 2.4% edge. In PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 3,977 versus 3,942, a 0.9% edge. These margins are within the range of what different thermal and power states can produce, but the database records them consistently across two tests.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel part has no hyperthreading support, so thread count equals core count.

Q: What is the difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 29,400, which is 124% higher than the Intel Core 3 305's 13,123. This is the largest gap in the Cinebench suite.

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

A: Yes, it wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test (1,852 vs. 1,807, a 2.4% margin) and the PassMark single-thread test (3,977 vs. 3,942, a 0.9% margin). Both are single-threaded tests.

Q: What memory bandwidth do these processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX supports dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their integrated graphics compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX uses Radeon 610M graphics. The Intel Core 3 305 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The database does not include graphics benchmarks for either part.

Q: What are the process nodes and foundries?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 3 305 is built on a 3 nm process at Intel. The Intel part uses a smaller process node, but the AMD part uses a dual-die design with a combined die size of 2x 71 mm².

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is based on Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, part of the Ryzen 9 7000 series. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 13,140 million transistors across a dual-die design of 2x 71 mm². Each of its 16 cores has 64 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache, with a shared 64 MB L3 cache. The multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking.

The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process at Intel. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, with 192 KB of L1 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache total. The L3 cache is 6 MB shared. The multiplier is locked, preventing overclocking. Intel does not list a transistor count or die size for this part.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The AMD part uses dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also diverges. The Ryzen 9 7940HX offers PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only). The Core 3 305 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). This difference affects expandability for GPUs, NVMe storage, and other high-bandwidth peripherals.

The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 610M, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The database does not include graphics performance metrics for either.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification category:

• Cores: AMD 16, Intel 6
• Threads: AMD 32, Intel 6
• Base clock: AMD 2.40 GHz, Intel 1.50 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD 5.20 GHz, Intel 4.30 GHz
• TDP: AMD 55 W, Intel 15 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FL1, Intel BGA 1516
• Process node: AMD 5 nm (TSMC), Intel 3 nm (Intel)
• L1 cache: AMD 64 KB per core, Intel 192 KB total
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 2.5 MB total
• L3 cache: AMD 64 MB, Intel 6 MB shared
• Memory support: AMD DDR5 dual-channel, Intel DDR5/LPDDR5X single-channel
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 83.2 GB/s, Intel 59.7 GB/s
• PCIe: AMD Gen 5, 28 lanes, Intel Gen 4, 6 lanes
• Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 610M, Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe)
• Multiplier: AMD unlocked, Intel locked
• Launch MSRP: Intel $309, AMD not listed

The production status for both is Active. The AMD part was released on 2024-01-16, while the Intel part has a release date of 2026-04-15. The Intel part's part number is SAE3L, and the AMD part's part number is 100-000001486.