AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall advantage for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, which wins 10 of the 11 head-to-head PassMark comparisons, while the Intel Core 3 304 takes only a single victory. The magnitude of those wins varies widely, and the most striking result is in integer math, where the AMD part scores 62,249 against 24,640 for the Intel chip, a delta of 152.6%. That workload, which stresses basic arithmetic operations across all cores, is the largest single margin in this comparison and reflects the AMD part's 6-core, 12-thread configuration against the Intel part's 5-core, 5-thread layout.

Data compression follows as the second-largest gap, with the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scoring 230,437 versus 114,775, a 100.8% advantage. This workload benefits directly from thread count, and the AMD part's 12 threads allow it to nearly double the output of the Intel Core 3 304. Random string sorting shows a similar trend: the AMD chip scores 25,181 against 13,659, a 84.4% lead, which again points to parallel efficiency rather than raw clock speed.

Extended instructions produce a 70.6% delta, with the AMD part scoring 16,520 and the Intel part scoring 9,686. This test measures SIMD-style workloads, and the AMD processor's Zen 5 / Zen 5c architecture appears to deliver substantially higher throughput in these vectorized operations. Multi-threaded performance overall shows a 65.7% gap: 19,262 for the AMD chip versus 11,625 for the Intel chip. That result aligns with the core and thread disparity, though the margin is smaller than in integer math or compression, suggesting that the Intel part's higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz helps it close some of the gap in mixed parallel workloads.

Floating point math gives the AMD processor a 42.1% lead, with scores of 42,248 and 29,722. This is a narrower margin than the integer test, indicating that the Intel Core 3 304 handles floating-point operations relatively better than it handles integer throughput. Data encryption shows a 34.6% advantage for the AMD chip, scoring 11,444 against 8,501, a meaningful but smaller gap that may reflect the presence of dedicated instruction support rather than raw core count alone. Physics simulation results in a 17.7% lead for the AMD part, with 1,022 versus 868, a moderate difference.

Single-thread performance is where the two processors are closest. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scores 3,713, while the Intel Core 3 304 scores 3,614, a delta of just 2.7%. Both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries confirm the same result. This near parity indicates that for lightly threaded tasks, the architectural differences between Zen 5 / Zen 5c and Wildcat Lake largely cancel out, and the Intel chip's 4.30 GHz boost clock nearly compensates for any per-clock advantage the AMD processor may hold.

The Intel Core 3 304's only victory comes in the prime number search test, where it scores 68 against the AMD part's 57, a 16.2% difference. This workload is highly sensitive to integer division and branch prediction, and the Intel chip's lower base clock of 1.50 GHz does not appear to hinder it here. The result suggests that the Wildcat Lake core has a specific strength in this algorithmic pattern, despite losing so heavily in other integer-based tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 records an average benchmark score of 37,804, while the Intel Core 3 304 records 13,745. The AMD part also sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 68th percentile for the Intel part.

Q: How close is the AMD processor to its nearest rivals?

A: The database lists the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 with a -0.1% delta against the Intel Core 5 211E, a 0.1% delta against the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435, a -0.3% delta against the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, and a -0.3% delta against the Intel Core i9-14901E. These are all near-identical average scores.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest delta is in passmark_integer_math, where the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 leads by 152.6%. The AMD part scores 62,249, and the Intel Core 3 304 scores 24,640.

Q: In which test does the Intel Core 3 304 outperform the AMD part?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 wins the passmark_find_prime_numbers test with a score of 68 against 57, a 16.2% advantage.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scores 3,713 in passmark_single_thread, and the Intel Core 3 304 scores 3,614, a 2.7% lead for the AMD processor. Both the single_thread and singlethread entries show identical values.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for the Intel Core 3 304?

A: The database lists the Intel Core 3 304 with a -0.3% delta against the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, a -0.9% delta against the Intel Core i7-8750H, a 1.1% delta against the Intel Core 5 120UL, and a -1.4% delta against the AMD EPYC 7443.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation built on Zen 5 / Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, is part of the Core 3 generation, and is built on a 3 nm process at Intel. Both are mobile-market parts and both are currently marked as active production.

The AMD processor provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel processor provides 5 cores and 5 threads. The Intel part has no hyper-threading, which explains its thread count matching its core count. The AMD part's cache layout is described per core: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3 total. The Intel part lists 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The larger L3 on the Intel chip is notable, though it does not translate into benchmark wins outside the prime number test.

Clock speeds differ. The AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The AMD chip therefore holds a 0.20 GHz boost advantage and a 0.50 GHz base advantage. Thermal design power also favors the Intel part on paper, with a 15 W TDP against the AMD part's 28 W, though the database does not provide efficiency measurements.

Memory support differs significantly. Both processors support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, but the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel Core 3 304 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the AMD chip provides Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, and the Intel chip provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD part uses a Radeon 840M, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible from the recorded data. The AMD part is not multiplier unlocked, and neither is the Intel part, so overclocking is not an option for either.

Sockets are incompatible. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 uses AMD Socket FP8, and the Intel Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516. Release dates are close, with the AMD part recorded as 2026-03-08 and the Intel part as 2026-04-15. The Intel part carries a part number of SAE3K, while the AMD part's part number is listed as unknown. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $309, which the database records but which does not factor into performance analysis.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 for workloads that scale with thread count. Its 10 wins out of 11 comparisons include massive margins in integer math, data compression, and multi-threaded throughput. The 152.6% lead in integer math and the 100.8% lead in data compression are not marginal differences; they represent roughly double the output in those specific tasks. The AMD part's 86th percentile ranking, compared to the 68th percentile for the Intel part, reinforces the overall performance hierarchy.

The Intel Core 3 304 does hold one genuine advantage in the prime number search test, with a 16.2% lead. Single-thread performance is effectively a tie, with the AMD part ahead by only 2.7%. For software that uses a single core or a few cores, the two processors will be difficult to distinguish in most cases. The Intel part also runs at a lower TDP of 15 W, which may matter in thermally constrained systems, though the database provides no efficiency measurements to quantify the trade-off.

The AMD part's dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth give it a structural advantage in memory-heavy workloads, and its ECC support makes it suitable for reliability-sensitive applications. The Intel part's single-channel bus at 59.7 GB/s is a clear limitation for data-intensive tasks. The Intel part does offer a larger shared L3 cache of 6 MB, but the benchmark results do not show this translating into broad performance gains.

For embedded or mobile systems where parallel throughput is the priority, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 is the stronger choice according to the recorded data. For systems where the prime number workload is dominant, or where the lower 15 W TDP is a hard constraint, the Intel Core 3 304 has a specific, narrow role. The near parity in single-thread scores means the decision should rest on thread scaling and memory bandwidth requirements.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded fields. Core count: 6 for the AMD part, 5 for the Intel part. Thread count: 12 versus 5. Base clock: 2.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz. Boost clock: 4.50 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. TDP: 28 W versus 15 W. Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 1516. Codename: Gorgon Point versus Wildcat Lake. Process node: 4 nm versus 3 nm. Foundry: TSMC versus Intel. Cache: 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, 4 MB L3 versus 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, 6 MB shared L3. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. Memory bus: dual-channel versus single-channel. ECC support: true versus false. PCIe: Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics: Radeon 840M versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe). Release date: 2026-03-08 versus 2026-04-15. Launch MSRP: none recorded for the AMD part, $309 for the Intel part. Part number: unknown versus SAE3K.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, multi-threaded performance, physics simulation, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. The largest margins are in integer math at 152.6%, data compression at 100.8%, and random string sorting at 84.4%. These are all parallel workloads, and the AMD part's 12 threads provide a consistent advantage. The physics test shows a smaller 17.7% lead, and single-thread performance is nearly even at 2.7%. The AMD part also holds the higher average benchmark score of 37,804 and the higher percentile ranking of 86.

The Intel Core 3 304 wins only the prime number search test, with a 16.2% lead. This is a narrow but real advantage in a workload that does not scale with thread count and appears to favor the Wildcat Lake core design. The Intel part also has the lower TDP of 15 W, which may make it preferable in power-constrained designs, and it carries the larger shared L3 cache of 6 MB. Its average benchmark score of 13,745 places it at the 68th percentile, which is below the AMD part but still above the median of all CPUs. For a system that runs prime number searches as the primary workload, the Intel part is the measured winner. For any other workload in this comparison, the AMD part leads.