AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 across all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Core 3 304 failing to secure a single win. The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math, where AMD scores 63,233 against Intel’s 24,640, a 156.6% advantage. That gap reflects the fundamental difference in thread count and core design, but even single-threaded tests, which typically favor higher clock speeds, show AMD ahead.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD delivers 11,534 points versus Intel’s 5,263, a 119.2% lead. The R15 multi-core test tells a similar story: 1,743 against 849, a 105.3% difference. These multi-threaded workloads amplify the AMD chip’s 12 threads versus Intel’s 5 threads, and the results confirm that the extra parallel execution capacity translates directly into measurable performance.

Single-core results are much closer, though AMD still wins. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1,802 versus 1,765, a 2.1% edge. PassMark single-thread shows 3,758 versus 3,614, a 4% difference. The R15 single-core test shows 276 versus 264, a 4.5% margin. These numbers indicate that Intel’s Wildcat Lake core is competitive per-thread, but AMD’s Zen 5 implementation maintains a consistent, if modest, advantage.

Memory-sensitive workloads reveal another layer. PassMark data compression shows AMD at 221,581 versus Intel’s 114,775, a 93.1% gap. Random string sorting, which depends heavily on memory latency and bandwidth, shows AMD at 24,334 versus 13,659, a 78.2% lead. The AMD platform’s dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth versus Intel’s single-channel 59.7 GB/s explains much of this divergence.

Encryption and extended instruction workloads also favor AMD. Data encryption scores 11,212 versus 8,501, a 31.9% difference. Extended instructions, which test SIMD and specialized operations, show 15,721 versus 9,686, a 62.3% advantage. Floating-point math shows 39,662 versus 29,722, a 33.4% lead. Even the prime number test, which often rewards raw integer throughput, shows AMD ahead at 74 versus 68, an 8.8% margin.

Physics simulation, a PassMark subtest that combines integer and floating-point work, shows AMD at 1,084 versus 868, a 24.9% lead. Multithreaded PassMark shows 19,215 versus 11,625, a 65.3% difference. The pattern is consistent: the AMD processor dominates wherever parallel execution or memory bandwidth matters, while the single-thread gap remains narrow enough that Intel’s core design cannot be dismissed entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD’s Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the Krackan Point codename and a die size of 195 mm². Intel’s Core 3 304 uses Wildcat Lake architecture on a 3 nm Intel process, with no recorded die size.

Core configuration differs sharply. AMD provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while Intel provides 5 cores and 5 threads. Intel’s Core 3 304 does not implement simultaneous multithreading, which halves its thread count relative to physical cores. AMD’s Zen 5 design includes SMT, doubling its thread capacity. That alone accounts for the massive multi-core benchmark disparity.

Cache hierarchies also diverge significantly. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The per-core cache strategy means AMD’s 6 cores each have dedicated L1 and L2 resources, while Intel’s smaller shared pools limit per-thread data locality.

Memory architecture reinforces the gap. AMD uses dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the channel count creates a 50% theoretical bandwidth difference. AMD also supports ECC memory, which Intel does not. PCIe lanes differ as well: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel offers Gen 4 with only 6 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ in branding and configuration. AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 840M graphics, while Intel includes Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The benchmark data does not include GPU-specific tests, so the graphics comparison remains qualitative.

Process node differences are notable. Intel’s 3 nm node is technically smaller than AMD’s 4 nm node, which could imply higher transistor density, but the measured performance does not reflect an advantage. Intel’s 15 W TDP versus AMD’s 28 W TDP indicates Intel targets lower power envelopes, yet the benchmark results show AMD delivering far higher performance at the cost of additional power draw.

Release timing also differs. AMD launched on January 5, 2025, while Intel’s release date is recorded as April 15, 2026. Both are active production parts for the mobile segment. AMD uses Socket FP8, Intel uses BGA 1516, and neither supports unlocked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 wins every recorded comparison. There is no test in the head-to-head set where Intel comes out ahead. The question becomes not which processor wins, but where Intel’s losses are narrow enough to matter.

The closest contests are single-threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 single-core shows only a 2.1% gap, and PassMark single-thread shows 4%. For applications that rely primarily on single-core performance, such as lightly threaded productivity tools or responsive UI interactions, the Intel Core 3 304 approaches parity. The R15 single-core margin of 4.5% reinforces this.

Prime number finding, which stresses simple integer loops, shows an 8.8% gap. That is the second-closest result. Workloads with minimal memory traffic and simple instruction patterns reduce the AMD advantage, because the extra threads and bandwidth remain underutilized.

For every other workload, the AMD processor’s lead ranges from substantial to overwhelming. Data compression, integer math, multithreaded rendering, and random string sorting all show gaps above 65%. These tasks exploit either the 12-thread capacity or the dual-channel memory subsystem. Users running video encoding, software compilation, database operations, or scientific simulations would see the largest real-world differences.

The Intel part’s lower TDP of 15 W versus 28 W suggests it could fit into fanless or ultra-light chassis, but the benchmark data does not include power efficiency measurements. The recorded scores only show performance, not energy consumption per task.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 has 12 threads from 6 cores, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 threads from 5 cores. AMD’s SMT implementation doubles thread count, Intel’s does not.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD scores 11,534 versus Intel’s 5,263, a 119.2% lead. In R15 multi-core, AMD scores 1,743 versus 849, a 105.3% difference.

Q: Is the single-core performance similar?

A: Yes, the gap is narrow. Cinebench R23 single-core shows AMD at 1,802 versus Intel at 1,765, a 2.1% difference. PassMark single-thread shows 3,758 versus 3,614, a 4% gap.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: AMD uses dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: AMD supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. This may matter for error-sensitive workloads.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: Intel uses a 3 nm process, while AMD uses a 4 nm process. Intel’s node is technically smaller, but the benchmark results do not show a performance benefit from this.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 | Intel Core 3 304 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 5 |

| Threads | 12 | 5 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Wildcat Lake |

| Codename | Krackan Point | Wildcat Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

| Die size | 195 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB total |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB total |

| L3 cache | 8 MB | 6 MB shared |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 lanes | Gen 4, 6 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 840M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Release date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $309 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 outperforms the Intel Core 3 304 in every recorded test, with the largest gaps appearing in multi-threaded and memory-intensive workloads. The AMD processor’s 6 cores and 12 threads, dual-channel memory, and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth create a structural advantage that Intel’s 5-core, single-channel design cannot overcome.

Users who need multi-core rendering, data compression, encryption, or any parallel workload should select the AMD part. The 119.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 156.6% lead in integer math translate to roughly double the throughput in many real applications.

The Intel Core 3 304 remains competitive only in single-threaded scenarios, where its 4.30 GHz boost clock and 3 nm process narrow the gap to 2-4%. For users prioritizing minimum power draw, Intel’s 15 W TDP versus AMD’s 28 W TDP may justify the performance sacrifice, though the database does not record efficiency measurements.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces the hierarchy. AMD sits at 27,932 with an 80th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while Intel sits at 13,745 with a 68th percentile. The nearest rival data places AMD near the Intel Core i9-10900K and AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, while Intel’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-8750H and AMD EPYC 7443. The performance class difference is substantial.

The Intel part’s launch MSRP of $309 appears in the database, but the AMD part has no recorded MSRP. Without pricing data for both, any cost-based comparison remains incomplete. The recorded data only supports a performance-based verdict: the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 is the superior processor across all measured benchmarks.