AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G and Intel Core 3 305 are both six-core desktop processors, but they are built for different roles. The benchmark data separates them clearly: the AMD part wins seven of eleven head-to-head tests, while the Intel part wins four. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G is the stronger multi-threaded and data-heavy processor, while the Intel Core 3 305 counters with better single-thread speed and specific integer workloads. The choice depends on whether the workload favors parallel throughput or single-core responsiveness.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G dominates in tasks that scale with thread count and memory bandwidth. It wins data compression with a score of 253484 against 146857, a 72.6% advantage. Integer math shows an even larger gap: 63707 versus 32295, a 97.3% lead. Random string sorting also goes decisively to AMD, 27407 versus 17623, a 55.5% margin. Extended instructions favor AMD by 38.1%, with scores of 18697 and 13543. Multithread performance, which reflects the combined workload across all cores, gives AMD 20285 against Intel's 15439, a 31.4% edge.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins in single-thread tests. PassMark single-thread shows Intel at 3977 versus AMD's 3829, a 3.7% advantage. The find prime numbers test goes heavily to Intel, 115 versus 55, a 52.2% lead. Physics simulation also favors Intel, 1233 versus 999, a 19% margin. These wins indicate that Intel's architecture is more efficient per thread for certain computational patterns.

In floating-point math, the two are close. AMD scores 43494, Intel scores 42284, with AMD ahead by only 2.9%. Data encryption is also a narrow AMD win, 12111 versus 11019, a 9.9% difference.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different nodes and use different core designs. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core 3 305 uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry. The AMD part is part of the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation with the codename Gorgon Point, using a hybrid of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel part belongs to the Core 3 generation, codename Wildcat Lake.

Core counts are identical at six each, but thread counts differ. AMD has 12 threads, Intel has 6. This means AMD can process two threads per core, while Intel runs one thread per core. That difference explains much of the multithread benchmark gap.

Cache layouts differ substantially. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. Intel has more L3 cache overall, but AMD has more L2 per core.

Memory support also diverges. AMD uses DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel memory bus, limiting bandwidth to 59.7 GB/s. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

PCIe configuration differs: AMD offers Gen 4 with 10 CPU lanes, Intel offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are present on both, with AMD using Radeon 840M and Intel using Xe3 Graphics with one Xe core.

The market segments differ. AMD is a desktop processor on Socket AM5, with a TDP of 65 watts. Intel is a mobile processor on BGA 1516, with a TDP of 15 watts. This power difference is notable: the AMD part uses over four times the thermal envelope. Clock speeds reflect that: AMD base clock is 2.00 GHz, boost clock is 4.50 GHz. Intel base clock is 1.50 GHz, boost clock is 4.30 GHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for AMD comes in integer math. The score of 63707 versus 32295 represents a 97.3% advantage, meaning AMD nearly doubles Intel's throughput in this workload. This test typically stresses arithmetic operations across all cores, and AMD's 12 threads versus Intel's 6 threads is the primary driver.

Data compression shows AMD ahead by 72.6%. Random string sorting, a test of memory access patterns and sorting algorithms, gives AMD a 55.5% lead. Extended instructions, which measure SIMD and specialized instruction execution, show AMD ahead by 38.1%. Multithread performance, an aggregate of parallel work, gives AMD a 31.4% lead.

The Intel wins are more modest in percentage terms. Single-thread performance is Intel's narrowest win, only 3.7% ahead. Physics simulation gives Intel a 19% lead, and find prime numbers gives Intel a 52.2% lead. The prime numbers test is an interesting case: Intel scores 115, AMD scores 55. This suggests Intel's core design is significantly faster at this specific calculation, which may rely on efficient division and modular arithmetic.

Floating-point math is nearly tied, with AMD ahead by 2.9%. Data encryption is closer still, with AMD ahead by 9.9%. These two tests indicate that for general floating-point workloads, the processors deliver similar results, but AMD's extra threads and higher memory bandwidth give it a slight edge.

The average benchmark score in the database places AMD at 40718, Intel at 18302. AMD sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, Intel at the 72nd percentile. AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6357P, which scores 40630 with a 0.2% difference, and the Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585 with a 0.3% difference. Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318, a 0.1% difference, and the Intel Core 5 330 at 18345, a 0.2% difference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G has 12 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 threads. Both have 6 physical cores.

Q: How much faster is AMD in multithread performance?

A: AMD scores 20285 in the PassMark multithread test, Intel scores 15439. AMD is 31.4% ahead.

Q: Does Intel win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes. Intel wins four tests: find prime numbers, physics, single-thread, and the duplicate single-thread entry. The largest Intel win is find prime numbers, with a 52.2% lead.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: AMD provides 89.6 GB/s with a dual-channel DDR5 bus. Intel provides 59.7 GB/s with a single-channel bus that supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Are both processors on the same process node?

A: No. AMD uses a 4 nm TSMC process. Intel uses a 3 nm process from its own foundry.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 305 does not.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G | Intel Core 3 305 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 6 |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Wildcat Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI PRO 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 cache | 4 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

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

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 10 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

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

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $309 |

The Verdict

The data shows two distinct performance profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G is the clear choice for multithreaded workloads, data compression, integer math, and any task that benefits from 12 threads. Its 97.3% lead in integer math and 72.6% lead in data compression are decisive. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth supports these workloads, and the 65 W TDP reflects its higher sustained output capability.

The Intel Core 3 305 is the better option for single-thread-bound applications. Its 3.7% single-thread advantage and 52.2% lead in prime number calculations indicate a core design that excels at sequential arithmetic. The 15 W TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained mobile contexts, and the 3 nm process node suggests higher efficiency per watt.

For users running parallel synthesis, database operations, or compression tasks, the AMD part delivers meaningfully higher throughput. For users prioritizing single-core responsiveness or operating in thermally limited environments, the Intel part provides a viable alternative despite its lower thread count and memory bandwidth.

The average benchmark scores confirm the separation: AMD at 40718 versus Intel at 18302, a 122.5% difference in aggregate performance. AMD's percentile ranking of 87 versus Intel's 72 places them in different performance tiers overall. The Intel Core 3 305 competes with the Intel Core i3-14100, which scores 18318, a 0.1% difference, indicating that it aligns with entry-level desktop parts. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G, by contrast, sits alongside the Intel Xeon 6357P at 40630, a 0.2% difference, placing it in a much higher performance class.

The specification differences reinforce this split. AMD's dual-channel memory, 10 PCIe lanes, and ECC support make it suitable for workstation and server-adjacent tasks. Intel's single-channel memory, 6 PCIe lanes, and lack of ECC point toward simpler, power-efficient designs. The socket difference is also significant: AMD uses AM5, a desktop socket, while Intel uses BGA 1516, which is typically soldered to a mobile board.

In practical terms, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G is the processor to select when compute density matters, especially for multi-threaded code. The Intel Core 3 305 is the processor to select when per-thread speed and low power draw take priority. The benchmark data does not favor one across all tests, but the magnitude of AMD's wins in compression, integer math, and multithread far exceeds the magnitude of Intel's wins in single-thread and prime numbers. That makes the AMD part the stronger overall performer, with Intel offering a narrow but real niche for single-thread efficiency.