AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G currently contains no benchmark entries, meaning the database shows zero wins for this processor in the head-to-head comparison. The Intel Core 3 305, by contrast, has a complete set of measured scores across Cinebench and Passmark workloads, giving it 17 recorded wins in the available test suite. This asymmetry means the comparison is based entirely on Intel’s measured output, while the AMD part’s performance profile is inferred solely from its architectural specifications.

Looking at the Intel data, the wins are distributed across both single-thread and multi-thread workloads. In Cinebench R23, the Core 3 305 scores 13,123 in multi-core and 1,852 in single-core. Passmark results show strong integer math performance at 32,295, floating-point math at 42,284, and data compression at 146,857. The processor also clears 15,439 in the Passmark multithread test and 3,977 in single-thread. These numbers place the Core 3 305 at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 18,302.

Because the AMD part has no recorded scores, the use-case split is heavily one-sided. The Intel Core 3 305 is the only processor in this pairing with verifiable performance data, so any workload analysis must rely on the Intel measurements alone. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, would logically target multi-threaded workloads based on its core count, but the database lacks the measured confirmation to support that claim. The data shows that the Intel processor wins every test currently recorded, though this is a function of missing AMD benchmarks rather than a true performance comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 195 mm² and a codename of Gorgon Point. It belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel Core 3 305 uses a 3 nm process from Intel, with a codename of Wildcat Lake and a Core 3 generation designation. The smaller process node gives Intel a potential density advantage, though the database does not list a die size for the Intel part.

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD processor has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel processor has 6 cores and 6 threads. This means the AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part does not. The cache hierarchy also differs. AMD lists 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. Intel lists 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Intel L3 is explicitly shared, while AMD’s L3 is listed without a shared designation but is likely shared across cores.

Memory support shows a stark contrast. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the AMD part uses a dual-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part uses a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. This gives AMD a 29.9 GB/s bandwidth advantage, which is a substantial difference for memory-intensive workloads. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

PCIe lanes also differ. The AMD processor provides 12 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel processor provides 6 Gen 4 lanes. This means the AMD part has double the PCIe connectivity for expansion devices such as GPUs or NVMe storage. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses a Radeon 860M, while Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The AMD part is classified as a desktop processor on the AM5 socket, while the Intel part is a mobile processor on the BGA 1516 socket.

Clock speeds show the AMD part with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The AMD processor has a 0.80 GHz higher boost clock, which typically benefits single-thread responsiveness. Thermal design power also differs sharply: the AMD part is rated at 65 W, while the Intel part is rated at 15 W. This gives Intel a much lower power envelope, suitable for mobile use, while AMD’s higher power target aligns with its desktop segment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no shared benchmark results between the two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G has no recorded scores, so a direct numerical comparison is impossible. The Intel Core 3 305, however, has a full set of measurements that can be interpreted on its own.

In Cinebench R15, the Intel part scores 1,322 in multi-core and 186 in single-core. In R20, it scores 5,511 multi-core and 777 single-core. In R23, the multi-core score is 13,123 and single-core is 1,852. These numbers show a typical scaling pattern where multi-core scores increase with each newer Cinebench version, while single-core scores rise more modestly.

Passmark results on the Intel processor show its strongest areas. Data compression scores 146,857, which is the highest single test value in the suite. Floating-point math scores 42,284, and integer math scores 32,295. Extended instructions score 13,543, and data encryption scores 11,019. Random string sorting scores 17,623, and find prime numbers scores 115. Physics scores 1,233, while the multithread test scores 15,439 and single-thread scores 3,977.

Relative to its nearest rivals in the database, the Intel Core 3 305 sits within a tight cluster. The Intel Core i3-14100 has an average score of 18,318, which is 0.1% higher than the Core 3 305’s 18,302. The Intel Core 5 330 averages 18,345, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core 7 360 averages 18,374, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600E averages 18,230, which is 0.4% lower. This places the Core 3 305 essentially in the middle of a four-way tie, with all rivals within 0.4% of each other. The data indicates that the Core 3 305 performs nearly identically to these established processors, with no meaningful performance gap in either direction.

Since the AMD part has no benchmarks, the head-to-head section can only describe the Intel measurements and their relative position against the listed rivals. The AMD processor’s architectural advantages, such as higher boost clock and dual-channel memory, suggest it would likely outperform the Intel part in many workloads, but the database provides no measured confirmation.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database shows zero benchmark entries for the AMD part, so its performance cannot be compared numerically to the Intel Core 3 305.

Q: What is the Intel Core 3 305’s average benchmark score and percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 has an average benchmark score of 18,302 and sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 305 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is within 0.4% of all four listed rivals. The Intel Core i3-14100 is 0.1% higher, the Intel Core 5 330 is 0.2% higher, the Intel Core 7 360 is 0.4% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E is 0.4% lower.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD part has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s using dual-channel memory, while the Intel part has 59.7 GB/s using single-channel memory. This gives AMD a 29.9 GB/s advantage.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 305 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The AMD part is 0.80 GHz higher.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Core 3 305 is the only processor in this pairing with measurable performance. It demonstrates competitive scores against its nearest rivals, all within a 0.4% band, and holds a 72nd percentile ranking. Its 15 W TDP makes it a low-power option for mobile systems, and its 6-core, 6-thread configuration handles both single-thread and multi-thread workloads adequately, as shown by its Cinebench and Passmark results.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G, however, offers architectural advantages that are clearly documented even without benchmark scores. It has more cores, more threads, a higher boost clock, dual-channel memory with higher bandwidth, ECC support, more PCIe lanes, and a larger L3 cache. These specifications point to superior multi-threaded performance and better memory throughput, but the database cannot confirm this without measured results.

The choice between the two depends on what the data supports. For a user who needs verified performance numbers and low power consumption, the Intel Core 3 305 is the only option with confirmed scores. For a user who prioritizes core count, memory bandwidth, and expansion capability, the AMD part’s specifications are compelling, but the lack of benchmarks means its real-world performance remains unverified in this database. The verdict is straightforward: Intel wins on measured evidence, AMD wins on paper specs, and the gap between them cannot be quantified until the AMD part receives benchmark entries.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450G | Intel Core 3 305 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| 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 | 8 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 4, 12 Lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 860M | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2026-03-01 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $309 |

| Part Number | 100-000001914 | SAE3L |