AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 vs Intel Core 3 N355 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 records an average benchmark score of 39485, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 3 N355 records an average score of 13492, placing it in the 68th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-threaded workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 scores 18316 versus 5262 for the Intel Core 3 N355, a 248.1% advantage for the AMD part. The gap is similar in PassMark multithread, where AMD leads by 159% with 26350 versus 10174.

Q: Does the Intel processor win any benchmark tests against the AMD processor?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows 15 benchmark comparisons, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 wins all 15. The Intel Core 3 N355 records zero wins in the recorded data.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: Both processors have 8 cores. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 supports 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 N355 supports 8 threads.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 has a TDP of 28, while the Intel Core 3 N355 has a TDP of 15.

Q: What memory configurations does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 with a single-channel memory bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear separation in capability. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 wins every single head-to-head comparison, but the magnitude of the wins varies dramatically by workload type. The data suggests two very different usage profiles.

For single-threaded performance, the AMD chip leads by 28% in Cinebench R15 single-core (215 versus 168) and by 96.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core (2038 versus 1039). The PassMark single-thread test shows an 81.2% advantage for AMD (3901 versus 2153). This indicates the AMD architecture delivers substantially stronger per-core execution, which matters for lightly threaded applications like legacy software, some productivity tools, and general desktop responsiveness.

The multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads show the largest deltas. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers a 248.1% advantage for AMD, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 230% gap. PassMark extended instructions, which tests SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, shows the biggest single delta at 275.3% (22400 versus 5968). Data compression favors AMD by 169%, and data encryption favors AMD by 100.1%. These are the workloads where the AMD chip's 16 threads versus 8 threads, combined with its higher boost clock, create a decisive separation.

The Intel Core 3 N355 does not have a single benchmark where it records a win. Its closest relative performance comes in single-threaded tests, where the delta shrinks to 28% in Cinebench R15 single-core, but it never overtakes the AMD part. The data implies the Intel chip is best suited to power-constrained, basic computing tasks where its 15 TDP envelope is the primary design consideration, not peak performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Gorgon Point, and belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process node by TSMC, with a die size of 195 mm². The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, part of the Core 3 generation based on Alder Lake-N, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process node by Intel.

Cache organization differs significantly. The AMD chip uses 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with a total of 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel chip uses 96 KB of L1 per core, but its L2 cache is 2 MB shared across all cores, and its L3 cache is 6 MB shared. The AMD design gives each core private L2, which can reduce contention in multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel design consolidates L2 into a shared pool.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, yielding 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel processor supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but only over a single-channel bus, capping bandwidth at 38.4 GB/s. This is a 51.4 GB/s difference in theoretical bandwidth, which directly impacts memory-intensive workloads like data compression and physics calculations.

ECC memory support is present on the AMD chip but absent on the Intel chip. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses the Radeon 860M, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. The AMD chip's boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 3.90 GHz for the Intel chip further explains the per-core performance gap.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are close: 2.00 GHz for AMD versus 1.90 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are not: 5.10 GHz for AMD versus 3.90 GHz for Intel.

TDP differs by 13: the AMD chip is rated at 28, the Intel chip at 15. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1264. The process node is 4 nm for AMD (TSMC) versus 10 nm for Intel (Intel foundry). Die size is 195 mm² for AMD, while the Intel die size is not recorded in the database.

Memory support: AMD lists DDR5 and LPDDR5X; Intel lists DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. Memory bus width: dual-channel for AMD, single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 38.4 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory: supported on AMD, not on Intel. PCIe: Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD versus Gen 3 with 9 lanes for Intel.

Integrated graphics: AMD uses Radeon 860M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. The AMD part number is 100-000001868, while the Intel part number is SRPNT. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD chip was released on 2026-01-04, while the Intel chip was released on 2025-01-06.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided, but the margins tell a nuanced story. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 wins all 15 recorded comparisons, with deltas ranging from 28% to 275.3%.

The largest win for AMD comes in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD scores 22400 versus 5968 for Intel, a 275.3% advantage. This test measures specialized instruction throughput, including SIMD operations, and the Zen 5 architecture's wider execution resources are evident here.

Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the second-largest win at 248.1% (18316 versus 5262). This is a 13054-point absolute difference, indicating massive scaling in multi-threaded rendering workloads. Cinebench R15 multi-core follows closely at 230% (2713 versus 822). PassMark find prime numbers shows a 229.6% delta (89 versus 27), which tests integer-heavy mathematical workloads.

Data compression favors AMD by 169% (315906 versus 117435). This workload benefits from both the higher memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s) and the extra threads. Integer math shows a 161.2% delta (88531 versus 33894), and PassMark multithread shows 159% (26350 versus 10174). Physics simulation favors AMD by 152.5% (1578 versus 625), and floating-point math by 139.9% (54447 versus 22695).

Random string sorting shows a 142.4% delta (35648 versus 14706). Data encryption shows a 100.1% delta (16247 versus 8121). The smallest margins are in single-threaded tests: Cinebench R15 single-core shows 28% (215 versus 168), PassMark single-thread shows 81.2% (3901 versus 2153), and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 96.2% (2038 versus 1039).

The pattern is consistent: the AMD chip's advantage grows with thread count and memory bandwidth demands. In single-threaded tests, the higher boost clock (5.10 GHz versus 3.90 GHz) and newer architecture still deliver a significant edge, but the gap is smaller than in multi-threaded tests.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a decisive outcome. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 outperforms the Intel Core 3 N355 in every recorded benchmark, with a minimum margin of 28% and a maximum of 275.3%. The AMD chip's average benchmark score of 39485 places it in the 87th percentile, while the Intel chip's 13492 places it in the 68th percentile.

For users running multi-threaded workloads, rendering, data compression, encryption, or any compute-heavy task, the AMD chip delivers between 100% and 275% higher performance. The 16-thread configuration, dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and 5.10 GHz boost clock collectively drive these results. The Intel chip's single-channel 38.4 GB/s memory and 8-thread limit create a ceiling that cannot be overcome in these tests.

For users prioritizing power efficiency, the Intel chip's 15 TDP versus 28 TDP is a meaningful specification difference. The data shows the Intel chip consumes less power by specification, but it also delivers far lower performance in every measured category. The Intel chip is the appropriate choice only when the 15 TDP limit is a hard system constraint, such as in fanless or ultra-compact mobile designs.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 sits in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, with nearest rivals including the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS (average score 39603, delta -0.3%) and the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D (average score 39768, delta -0.7%). The Intel Core 3 N355 sits in the 68th percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core i3-12100F (average score 13494, delta 0%) and the Intel Core i7-1250U (average score 13351, delta 1.1%). The Intel chip's nearest rival data shows it performs at the level of a desktop Core i3-12100F, while the AMD chip operates in the class of high-end Ryzen 7 parts.

The verdict from the recorded data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 is the higher-performing processor across all measured workloads, with its smallest advantage being a 28% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core. The Intel Core 3 N355's only recorded advantage is its lower 15 TDP specification, which may suit specific power-limited designs but does not translate into any benchmark win.