AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G vs Intel Core 3 N355 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G wins all 11 head-to-head comparisons, with no benchmark victories recorded for the Intel Core 3 N355. The margins are substantial across every workload category, ranging from a 100.1% advantage in single-thread performance to a 372.9% lead in extended instructions.

The largest delta appears in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD part scores 28,223 against Intel's 5,968. This 372.9% advantage indicates a massive difference in workloads that leverage specialized instruction sets. Data compression follows with a 243% lead: 402,831 versus 117,435. The AMD processor also dominates integer math by 194.2% (99,732 versus 33,894) and floating-point math by 180.6% (63,683 versus 22,695).

Multithreaded performance shows a 199% gap, with the Ryzen AI 7 450G scoring 30,422 compared to the Core 3 N355's 10,174. Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive workload, shows a 190.1% advantage for AMD (42,663 versus 14,706). Prime number finding rounds out the larger deltas at 222.2% (87 versus 27), while data encryption shows a 133.2% lead (18,937 versus 8,121) and physics simulation a 130.4% edge (1,440 versus 625).

Single-thread results are the closest relative comparison, yet still show a 100.1% advantage: 4,309 versus 2,153. This means the AMD processor delivers roughly double the single-core throughput of the Intel part. The average benchmark scores reinforce the overall picture, with the Ryzen AI 7 450G averaging 63,331 across all tests versus 13,492 for the Core 3 N355. The AMD chip sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part lands in the 68th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation built on Zen 5 / Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process 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 manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node.

Core counts are identical at 8, but threading differs significantly. The AMD processor supports 16 threads via simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part manages 8 threads with no hyperthreading. This structural difference directly explains much of the multithreaded benchmark gap.

Cache layouts diverge sharply. The Ryzen AI 7 450G has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. The Core 3 N355 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD configuration provides more total cache per core and a larger L3 pool, which benefits workloads with high data reuse.

Memory support marks another major divergence. The AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC memory capability. The Intel part supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC support. The 2.33x bandwidth advantage for AMD contributes to its large leads in memory-intensive benchmarks like random string sorting and data compression.

PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 12 CPU lanes, while Intel offers Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are present on both, with AMD using Radeon 860M and Intel using UHD Graphics 770. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier and uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel part is locked, uses Intel BGA 1264, and is classified as a mobile segment product versus AMD's desktop segment designation.

Clock speeds show a meaningful gap. The AMD processor has a 2.00 GHz base clock and 5.10 GHz boost clock. The Intel part has a 1.90 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost. The 1.2 GHz boost advantage for AMD directly supports its single-thread lead. Power envelopes differ substantially: the AMD chip carries a 65 W TDP, while the Intel part is rated at 15 W, reflecting their different market positions.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G wins every measured category, so the question becomes which workloads benefit most from its advantages. The largest margins appear in extended instructions (372.9%), data compression (243%), and prime number finding (222.2%), suggesting compute-heavy scientific and cryptographic workloads see the greatest benefit. The AMD processor's dual-channel memory and larger L3 cache make it particularly suited for data manipulation tasks like compression and sorting, where it leads by 243% and 190.1% respectively.

Multithreaded applications gain substantially from the AMD part's 16 threads versus Intel's 8. The 199% multithread delta indicates that parallel rendering, compilation, and video encoding workloads will complete in roughly half the time on the AMD platform. The single-thread advantage of 100.1% means even lightly threaded applications like legacy software, office suites, and general desktop responsiveness are roughly twice as fast on the AMD processor.

The Intel Core 3 N355, despite losing all benchmarks, retains relevance through its dramatically lower power envelope. Its 15 W TDP versus AMD's 65 W makes it suitable for fanless designs and battery-constrained mobile deployments where sustained performance is secondary to energy efficiency. The Intel part also supports DDR4 memory, which can reduce platform costs in upgrade paths, and its BGA 1264 socket targets compact embedded and mobile form factors.

The Intel processor's benchmark profile shows it performs closest to the AMD part in data encryption (133.2% delta) and physics (130.4% delta), suggesting these workloads are relatively less unfavorable to the Intel architecture. However, even these "best" relative results represent more than double the AMD score.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G scores 4,309 in PassMark single-thread tests versus 2,153 for the Intel Core 3 N355, a 100.1% advantage.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The AMD processor provides 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X bus, while the Intel part offers 38.4 GB/s over a single-channel bus supporting DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5.

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

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

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G boosts to 5.10 GHz, compared to 3.90 GHz for the Intel Core 3 N355. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz and 1.90 GHz respectively.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G has ECC memory support enabled, while the Intel Core 3 N355 does not support ECC.

Q: What percentile rank does each processor hold in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 3 N355 ranks in the 68th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G | Intel Core 3 N355 |

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

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Twin Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | 195 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 96 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2 MB shared |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 12 lanes | Gen 3, 9 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 860M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier | Unlocked | Locked |

| Release Date | 2026-02-28 | 2025-01-06 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data delivers a clear verdict: the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G outperforms the Intel Core 3 N355 by a wide margin across every recorded workload. With 11 wins out of 11 head-to-head comparisons, the AMD processor is the superior choice for any application where raw performance matters. Its 16 threads, 5.10 GHz boost clock, dual-channel 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 8 MB L3 cache combine to deliver scores that are roughly 2x to 4.7x higher than the Intel part depending on the workload.

The AMD processor's 93rd percentile ranking versus Intel's 68th percentile places them in different performance tiers entirely. The average benchmark score of 63,331 for AMD versus 13,492 for Intel confirms that these processors are not direct competitors in performance terms. The nearest rivals to the AMD chip include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX (0.2% delta), Intel Core i7-13790F (0.4% delta), and AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 (-0.7% delta), all of which are substantially more powerful than the Core 3 N355. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F (0% delta) and Intel Core i5-9500 (0.3% delta), indicating its true performance bracket.

The Intel Core 3 N355's case rests entirely on its 15 W TDP and mobile form factor. For passively cooled embedded systems, battery-powered devices, or applications where power draw is the primary constraint, the Intel part offers a functional computing solution. Its DDR4 support and single-channel memory simplify low-cost platform designs, and its BGA 1264 socket enables compact motherboard layouts.

For desktop users, workstation workloads, or any scenario where performance per watt is not the deciding factor, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G is the definitive choice based on the recorded data. The performance gap is so large that the Intel processor cannot be recommended for performance-sensitive applications. The AMD chip's unlocked multiplier and AM5 socket also provide upgrade flexibility that the locked BGA Intel part cannot match. The data supports choosing the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G unless the 65 W power envelope is strictly prohibitive, in which case the Core 3 N355 serves as a low-power alternative with substantially reduced throughput.