AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 and Intel Core 3 304 represent two distinct approaches to mobile processing. The AMD part is a high-core-count Zen 5 design aimed at performance, while the Intel chip is a low-core, low-power Wildcat Lake part. The database shows a decisive performance gap, with the AMD processor winning all 15 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 achieves an average benchmark score of 32662, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 304 scores 13745, landing in the 68th percentile. This analysis breaks down the architectural differences, benchmark results, and the specific workloads where each processor excels.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 13794, which is 162.1% ahead of the Intel Core 3 304's 5263.

Q: How close are the single-core scores?

A: The gap is smaller in single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part leads by 10.9%, scoring 1958 versus 1765 for the Intel. In PassMark single-thread, the difference is 6.9%, with scores of 3862 and 3614 respectively.

Q: What are the power and memory specifications?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 has a 28 W TDP and dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 304 has a 15 W TDP and single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 3 304 does not.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Core 3 304 uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Point codename, belonging to the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC with a die size of 233 mm². The CPU offers 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The integrated graphics are handled by the Radeon 880M.

The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename from the Core 3 generation, built on a 3 nm process by Intel. It is a much smaller design with 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. Its base clock is 1.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The cache configuration differs significantly: 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. Graphics come from the Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core.

The platforms also diverge. The AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP8 and supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1516 and supports PCIe Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. Memory support for both includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the AMD processor is dual-channel with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel processor is single-channel with 59.7 GB/s. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel chip. The production status for both is active, but the release dates differ, with the AMD part releasing in January 2025 and the Intel part in April 2026.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 delivers substantially higher scores across every recorded benchmark, making it the appropriate choice for workloads that demand processing power. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration, larger cache, and dual-channel memory support provide a strong foundation for multi-threaded applications. The Intel Core 3 304, with its 5 cores and 5 threads, 15 W TDP, and single-channel memory, is positioned for efficiency and lighter tasks.

Users requiring high throughput in rendering, data compression, or integer math should select the AMD part, as its benchmark wins are consistent and often massive. The Intel chip, while slower, operates at a lower 15 W TDP, which may be preferable for systems where power draw is the primary concern. The Intel part also has a launch MSRP of $309. The AMD processor's 83rd percentile ranking versus the Intel's 68th percentile reinforces its higher overall standing in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The base clock of the AMD part is 2.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz for the Intel, and the boost clock is 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. The TDP is 28 W for AMD and 15 W for Intel.

Cache configurations are distinct. The AMD chip features 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, while the Intel chip has a flat 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2. The L3 cache is 8 MB on the AMD part and 6 MB shared on the Intel part. The process node is 4 nm for AMD (TSMC) and 3 nm for Intel (Intel foundry). The AMD die size is 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The AMD processor uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Intel processor uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s and no ECC. PCIe lane counts also differ: 16 lanes for AMD and 6 lanes for Intel, both at Gen 4. The integrated graphics are the Radeon 880M for AMD and the Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) for Intel. The sockets are AMD Socket FP8 for the AMD chip and Intel BGA 1516 for the Intel chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 wins all 15 recorded head-to-head benchmarks against the Intel Core 3 304. The largest margin comes in PassMark integer math, where the AMD scores 77414 versus 24640, a 214.2% advantage. This suggests a major difference in general arithmetic and logic operations. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 13794 against 5263, a 162.1% lead, confirming its strength in heavily threaded rendering workloads. The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a similar pattern, with the AMD at 2023 and the Intel at 849, a 138.3% difference.

Data compression results also favor the AMD chip heavily. The PassMark data compression score is 256603 for AMD versus 114775 for Intel, a 123.6% gap. Random string sorting shows a 107.8% difference, with scores of 28390 and 13659. The PassMark multithread score is 22125 for AMD and 11625 for Intel, a 90.3% lead. Extended instructions performance is 86.1% higher on the AMD side, with scores of 18029 and 9686.

The margins shrink in single-threaded and lighter workloads, but the AMD chip still leads. In PassMark floating point math, the AMD scores 46996 versus 29722, a 58.1% advantage. Data encryption shows a 56% difference, with 13264 versus 8501. PassMark physics scores are 1257 for AMD and 868 for Intel, a 44.8% lead. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows a 10.9% difference, with 1958 versus 1765. Cinebench R15 single-core is close, 271 versus 264, a 2.7% margin. PassMark single-thread scores are 3862 versus 3614, a 6.9% difference. The smallest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the AMD scores 76 versus 68, an 11.8% lead.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is the clear winner across all recorded benchmark categories. Its largest advantages appear in multi-threaded and integer-heavy tasks. The 214.2% lead in integer math and the 162.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core indicate that the AMD processor is suited for content creation, 3D rendering, and complex calculations. The 123.6% advantage in data compression and the 107.8% lead in random string sorting point to strong performance in file archiving and database-style operations. The 90.3% multithread score lead further confirms its capability in parallel workloads.

The Intel Core 3 304 wins no benchmarks in this comparison, so its strengths must be inferred from its specifications rather than its results. Its 15 W TDP is lower than the AMD's 28 W, suggesting it may fit into thinner, more power-efficient designs. Its 3 nm process node from Intel is the smaller of the two, which could contribute to efficiency. The single-channel memory and 6 PCIe lanes indicate a more limited platform, but for basic productivity, web browsing, or light office tasks, the Intel chip may be adequate, albeit with significantly lower performance scores. The AMD part remains the superior choice for any workload where performance is the priority, while the Intel part is the option for systems that prioritize lower power consumption above all else.