AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits cleanly between these two mobile processors. AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 wins every single benchmark in the comparison set, 15 wins to 0. There is no test in the database where Intel Core 3 304 posts a higher score. That makes the use-case analysis straightforward: the AMD part dominates all measured workloads, while the Intel part is positioned for tasks where its lower power draw and smaller physical footprint matter more than raw performance.

For heavily threaded workloads, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 is the clear choice. Its 8 cores and 16 threads produce a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16014.5, which is 204.3% higher than the Intel Core 3 304's 5263. This margin is not a small edge; it is a full scale of difference. The PassMark integer math test shows a 247.6% delta, with AMD at 85651 versus Intel at 24640. The AMD part also leads in data compression by 164.9%, scoring 304089 against 114775. These are not workloads where the Intel chip can compete; the thread count disparity is too large.

Single-threaded performance is closer, but the AMD part still leads. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD chip scores 1958 versus 1765, a 10.9% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows 3834 against 3614, a 6.1% delta. The Intel part is not embarrassing in lightly threaded work, but it is consistently behind. The AMD part also wins the PassMark physics test by 55.4% and the floating point math test by 79.1%, so the gap is not confined to integer or rendering workloads.

The Intel Core 3 304 does have one thing going for it in the database: its 15W TDP is nearly half the AMD part's 28W TDP. In a fanless or low-power mobile chassis, that difference can be decisive for thermal management and battery life. The AMD part also uses a dual-channel memory bus, while the Intel part is single-channel, a structural factor that shows up in the memory bandwidth figures: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 59.7 GB/s for Intel. For the buyer who needs maximum compute from a low-power envelope, the Intel chip is the only one of the two that fits that profile.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 uses the Zen 5 architecture from the Krackan Point family, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The die size is 195 mm². The Intel Core 3 304 comes from the Wildcat Lake family, built on an Intel 3 nm process. Its architecture is not listed in the database, but the process node difference suggests a more modern fabrication method for the Intel part.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD part provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part lists 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD configuration is per-core, while the Intel figures are aggregate, which makes direct comparison tricky. Still, the AMD chip has more L3 cache in absolute terms.

Memory support is similar on paper: both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X. But the AMD part runs dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part is single-channel with 59.7 GB/s. That is a significant architectural split. The PCIe configuration also differs: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has far more expansion headroom for discrete GPUs or high-speed storage.

The integrated graphics are different too. AMD pairs its CPU with a Radeon 860M, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The database does not include GPU benchmark scores for either part, so any comparison would be speculation. What is clear is that the AMD part carries a larger, more capable-looking GPU solution based on its position in the product stack.

The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading or equivalent SMT. That is a major architectural divergence: the Intel chip cannot extract extra work from idle execution units the way the AMD chip can. The AMD part also boosts to 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz for Intel, and its base clock is 2.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Starting with multi-threaded rendering, the Cinebench R23 multicore test shows AMD at 16014.5 against Intel at 5263, a 204.3% delta. The Cinebench R15 multicore test tells the same story: 2477 versus 849, a 191.8% delta. These are the largest margins in the set and reflect the 11-thread difference in the two CPUs.

Integer math is where the AMD part is most dominant. PassMark integer math scores 85651 for AMD versus 24640 for Intel, a 247.6% delta. This is the single largest percentage gap in the entire head-to-head table, even larger than the Cinebench multi-core margins. Data compression follows at 304089 versus 114775, a 164.9% delta. Random string sorting shows 33266 versus 13659, a 143.5% delta. Extended instructions score 21678 versus 9686, a 123.8% delta.

The PassMark multithread test shows 24935 for AMD versus 11625 for Intel, a 114.5% delta. This metric is a broad mix of parallel work and confirms that the AMD part is roughly twice as fast in general threaded execution. Data encryption shows 15244 versus 8501, a 79.3% delta. Floating point math shows 53230 versus 29722, a 79.1% delta. Physics shows 1349 versus 868, a 55.4% delta. Prime number finding shows 80 versus 68, a 17.6% delta.

Single-threaded tests are the narrowest margins. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1958 versus 1765, a 10.9% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 294 versus 264, an 11.4% delta. PassMark single-thread shows 3834 versus 3614, a 6.1% delta. The AMD part still wins every one, but the small deltas suggest that the Intel core design is not far behind in lightly threaded work.

The average benchmark score in the database reflects the overall gap: AMD sits at 34222, Intel at 13745. The AMD part ranks at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while Intel ranks at the 68th. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4244P at 34220 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X at 34260 (-0.1%), and the Intel Core i5-13450HX at 34333 (-0.3%). The Intel Core 3 304's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13786 (-0.3%), the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868 (-0.9%), and the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594 (1.1%).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every major specification. Cores: 8 versus 5. Threads: 16 versus 5. Base clock: 2.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz. Boost clock: 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. TDP: 28W versus 15W. Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 1516.

Cache: AMD provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB L3. Intel provides 192 KB L1 total, 2.5 MB L2 total, and 6 MB L3 shared. Process node: 4 nm TSMC versus 3 nm Intel. Memory bus: dual-channel versus single-channel. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. PCIe lanes: 16 versus 6, both Gen 4. Integrated graphics: Radeon 860M versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe).

Release dates differ notably: the AMD part was released on 2025-01-05, while the Intel part is dated 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $309, a figure the database records for it. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed. Both are mobile parts with active production status. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350. It scores 16014.5 in Cinebench R23 multicore versus 5263 for the Intel Core 3 304, a 204.3% advantage. In PassMark multithread, AMD scores 24935 versus 11625, a 114.5% delta.

Q: Is the Intel Core 3 304 competitive in single-threaded performance?

A: It is closer but still behind. The AMD part leads by 10.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1958 versus 1765) and by 6.1% in PassMark single-thread (3834 versus 3614). The Intel core is not far off, but it does not win any single-threaded test.

Q: What are the largest benchmark gaps between the two?

A: The largest is PassMark integer math, where AMD leads by 247.6% (85651 versus 24640). Cinebench R23 multicore follows at 204.3%, with Cinebench R15 multicore at 191.8% and data compression at 164.9%.

Q: Does the Intel part have any advantages in the database?

A: Yes, in power draw. The Intel Core 3 304 has a 15W TDP versus 28W for the AMD part. It also uses a 3 nm process from Intel, compared to 4 nm TSMC for AMD. Its launch MSRP is $309, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

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

Q: Which part has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 has 16 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core 3 304 has 6 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). This gives the AMD part more room for discrete components.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. It wins all 15 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 6.1% in single-threaded work to 247.6% in integer math. It has more cores, more threads, higher clocks, more cache, a wider memory bus, and more PCIe lanes. Its 84th percentile ranking versus 68th for Intel confirms the overall performance gap.

The Intel Core 3 304 is not without a role. Its 15W TDP makes it a candidate for thin-and-light machines where thermal limits are strict and battery life is a priority. Its 3 nm process node indicates a modern manufacturing approach. For a user whose workload is light and whose chassis cannot dissipate 28W, the Intel part is the only one of the two that fits that envelope. But for any task that scales with cores, threads, or memory bandwidth, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 is the correct choice. The benchmark data does not show a single workload where Intel wins, and the average score difference is roughly 2.5 times in AMD's favor.