AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 and Intel Core 3 305 occupy the same mobile segment and land within one percentile point of each other in the database rankings (73rd versus 72nd), yet the head-to-head record shows a lopsided contest: the Intel Core 3 305 takes 12 of 15 recorded benchmark wins, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 claims 3. The recorded data suggests two chips with near-identical aggregate profiles but sharply different strengths underneath. (Note on the "Core 3 305" release date of 2026-04-15: the database records it as listed; the analysis below uses only recorded values.)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Start with the largest gap in the entire dataset: passmark_find_prime_numbers. The Core 3 305 scores 115 against 42 for the Ryzen AI 5 330, a 63.5% deficit for the AMD part. That is an integer-heavy, fully parallel workload, and it previews the pattern of the whole comparison.

Cinebench R23 multicore tells the same story at nearly the same magnitude: 13123 for Intel against 7840 for AMD, a 40.3% gap. The older Cinebench R15 multicore run is closer (1322 versus 1191, 9.9% in Intel's favor), but the direction never changes. Passmark physics follows suit at 1233 versus 705, a 42.8% Intel win, and passmark floating point math lands at 42284 versus 26196, 38% in Intel's favor.

Single-threaded results are where the picture complicates. Passmark single thread goes to Intel by 11.6%, 3977 versus 3515. Cinebench R23 single core also goes to Intel, but narrowly: 1852 versus 1812, just 2.2%. And in Cinebench R15 single core the Ryzen AI 5 330 wins outright, 199.9 versus 186, a 7.5% margin. Single-thread performance between these two is, on this evidence, close to a wash, with the sign of the result depending on the test generation used.

The Ryzen AI 5 330's three wins cluster around integer and memory-flavored workloads. Its best result is passmark integer math: 37771 versus 32295, a 17% margin. It also takes passmark data compression at 152012 versus 146857, 3.5% ahead, on top of that Cinebench R15 single-core win. Both of those Passmark wins plausibly trace back to its substantially higher memory bandwidth, 89.6 GB/s on a dual-channel bus versus 59.7 GB/s single-channel on the Intel chip.

Two more results complete the sweep for Intel: passmark data encryption at 11019 versus 7251 (34.2%), and passmark extended instructions at 13543 versus 11124 (17.9%). Passmark multithread finishes at 15439 versus 12797 (17.1% Intel), and random string sorting at 17623 versus 16188 (8.1% Intel). Aggregate averages, 18811 for AMD versus 18302 for Intel, end up nearly tied because the two chips sit in different rival clusters: the Ryzen AI 5 330 sits within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-1355U, while the Core 3 305 sits within 0.1% of the Intel Core i3-14100.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core 3 305, decisively. It wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 40.3% (13123 versus 7840), Cinebench R15 multicore by 9.9%, Passmark multithread by 17.1%, and Passmark physics by 42.8%. Six physical cores without SMT simply outpace four cores with eight threads in the recorded data.

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core workloads?

A: Roughly even. The Core 3 305 leads Passmark single thread by 11.6% and Cinebench R23 single core by 2.2%, but the Ryzen AI 5 330 wins Cinebench R15 single core by 7.5%. No single chip dominates lightly threaded work.

Q: Which chip has the better memory subsystem?

A: The AMD part. It supports a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth versus single-channel, 59.7 GB/s on the Core 3 305, and that advantage shows up in its data compression and integer math wins.

Q: How do their database rankings compare?

A: Nearly identical. The Ryzen AI 5 330 sits in the 73rd percentile against all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 18811; the Core 3 305 sits in the 72nd percentile at 18302.

Q: Which is the lower-power design?

A: The Intel Core 3 305, with a TDP of 15 versus 28 for the Ryzen AI 5 330.

Q: Which CPU offers more PCIe connectivity?

A: The Ryzen AI 5 330, with 14 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU versus 6 Gen 4 lanes on the Core 3 305.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core 3 305 for anyone whose workload scales across cores. Its 12-of-15 win record includes every sustained multi-core test in the database, several by margins north of 30%: encryption, prime finding, floating point, physics, and Cinebench R23 multi. If the machine will render, encode, or compute for extended periods, the recorded numbers favor Intel without qualification, and it does so at a lower TDP.

The Ryzen AI 5 330 earns its slot on three grounds. First, its integer math lead of 17% and its data compression win make it the pick for workloads of that character. Second, its platform is broader: double the memory bandwidth, twice the memory channels, and more than double the CPU PCIe lanes, which matters for fast storage or add-in connectivity. Third, its single-core results are close enough that responsiveness-oriented users give up little: within 2.2% in Cinebench R23 single core, and ahead in the R15 single-core run.

Neither chip is unlocked, both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, and neither supports ECC, so tuning and platform features beyond those already noted do not separate them. The Core 3 305 carries a launch MSRP of $309; the database records no launch MSRP for the Ryzen AI 5 330.

Specification Differences

The two chips diverge on nearly every structural specification. The Ryzen AI 5 330 has 4 cores and 8 threads; the Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Clocks favor AMD on both ends: a 2.00 base and 4.50 boost versus 1.50 base and 4.30 boost. TDP favors Intel, 15 versus 28. Sockets differ entirely, AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 1516, as do part numbers (100-000001897 versus SAE3L).

Cache is structured differently. AMD lists 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core with 4 MB of L3; Intel lists 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The memory bus splits the two further: dual-channel with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth on AMD, single-channel with 59.7 GB/s on Intel. PCIe counts 14 Gen 4 CPU lanes for AMD against 6 for Intel. Integrated graphics differ too: the Radeon 820M on AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) on the Core 3 305. Both are active, mobile-segment parts supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X without ECC.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen AI 5 330 is a Zen 5 design, codenamed Krackan Point 2, part of the Ryzen AI 300 generation mixing Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process node. The Core 3 305 is codenamed Wildcat Lake, part of the Core 3 generation, and is built by Intel on a 3 nm node; the database records no architecture family name for it beyond that.

The core topology is the defining architectural split. AMD pairs four cores with SMT to reach eight threads, boosting to 4.50. Intel deploys six physical cores with no SMT, six threads total, at a lower 4.30 boost, yet the extra two physical cores carry the multi-core results: physical cores with dedicated resources outperform four SMT-enabled cores in every sustained parallel test recorded here. Intel's larger shared L3 pool of 6 MB may also help its throughput results, while AMD's per-core cache allocation pairs with its bandwidth advantage to drive the integer and compression wins.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 305 wins wherever parallelism dominates: Cinebench multicore rendering across R15 and R23, Passmark multithread, physics, floating point math (38% ahead), encryption (34.2% ahead), prime number search (63.5% ahead), extended instructions, and string sorting. It also leads most single-thread measures, albeit narrowly in Cinebench R23. Buyers running renders, simulations, physics workloads, and cryptographic or prime-based computations should expect the Core 3 305 to finish well ahead, at a lower TDP of 15.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 wins integer math by 17%, data compression by 3.5%, and Cinebench R15 single core by 7.5%. Its platform advantages, dual-channel memory at 89.6 GB/s and 14 Gen 4 CPU lanes, make it the stronger foundation for bandwidth-hungry integer workloads and expandable storage connectivity, all within a near-tied aggregate profile: 18811 average score at the 73rd percentile, against 18302 at the 72nd for Intel. The split is clean: choose Intel for throughput, choose AMD for integer performance, memory bandwidth, and I/O headroom.