AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 and the Intel Core 3 304 occupy distinct positions in the mobile processor landscape. The recorded data shows a clear separation in performance tiers, with the AMD part delivering substantially higher throughput across all measured workloads. The Intel Core 3 304, by contrast, targets efficiency and basic computing tasks. This analysis examines the benchmark results, architectural decisions, and specification differences that define these two processors.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results are decisive: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 wins all 11 recorded comparisons. The Intel Core 3 304 does not secure a single victory in the shared PassMark test suite. This does not mean the Intel part lacks utility; rather, its design goals prioritize power efficiency and adequate single-thread performance for basic tasks, not peak throughput.

The AMD processor's wins span every category of computation measured. In data compression, it scores 374429 against 114775, a 226.2% advantage. This indicates superior memory bandwidth and core efficiency for handling large data streams. The integer math test shows the largest gap, with AMD scoring 117832 versus 24640, a 378.2% delta. This workload benefits directly from the AMD part's 12 cores and 24 threads, allowing parallel processing that the 5-core, 5-thread Intel part cannot match.

Single-thread performance is the closest contest. The AMD part scores 3977, while the Intel processor reaches 3614, a 10% difference. This narrow margin suggests that for lightly threaded applications, such as office productivity or web browsing, the two processors perform at similar levels. The Intel part's 4.30 GHz boost clock, despite fewer cores, keeps it within striking distance in this specific metric.

The Intel Core 3 304, with a 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs, places well below the AMD part's 93rd percentile. The Intel processor's average benchmark score of 13745 is roughly one-fifth of the AMD part's 62839. This data indicates the Intel part suits entry-level laptops where battery life and thermals outweigh raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different silicon designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core 3 304 uses a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. Both are active production parts for the mobile segment, but their architectural choices diverge sharply.

AMD implements a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c configuration under the Gorgon Point codename. This generation combines high-performance cores with efficiency-focused cores, though the database does not specify the exact core distribution. The result is 12 cores and 24 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading that doubles the thread count. Intel's Wildcat Lake generation takes a different path: 5 cores and 5 threads, with no multithreading support. This reflects a simpler, lower-power design philosophy.

Cache hierarchies reveal another major difference. The AMD part allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 16 MB L3 pool. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD processor's larger L3 cache, combined with the per-core L2 allocation, reduces memory latency for frequently accessed data. The Intel part's smaller cache footprint aligns with its lower core count and reduced performance targets.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 890M graphics, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with a single Xe core. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so direct comparison is not possible, but the AMD Radeon 890M represents a higher-tier integrated solution. Memory support for both includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the AMD part uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel processor uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. This bandwidth disparity directly impacts the memory-intensive workloads where AMD shows massive wins.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while Intel offers Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. This affects expansion options for discrete GPUs or fast storage. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Intel processor, which matters for reliability-sensitive embedded or workstation applications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The PassMark suite provides a comprehensive view of performance differences. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 dominates every test, but the magnitude varies significantly by workload type.

Data compression shows a 226.2% delta, with AMD scoring 374429 versus 114775. This workload taxes memory bandwidth and multi-core parallelism, both areas where AMD holds structural advantages. Data encryption yields a 130.7% delta, AMD at 19612 versus 8501, reflecting the benefit of more cores handling cryptographic operations. Extended instructions, which test SIMD and specialized instruction sets, show a 174% delta with scores of 26544 and 9686.

Prime number finding, a pure integer workload, gives AMD a 89.7% advantage, 129 versus 68. Floating-point math shows a 137.5% delta, 70587 versus 29722. Integer math delivers the most lopsided result: AMD scores 117832 against 24640, a 378.2% gap. This test scales strongly with core count and thread count, where AMD's 24 threads overwhelm Intel's 5.

The multithread benchmark, an overall measure of parallel performance, gives AMD 31817 versus Intel's 11625, a 173.7% delta. Physics simulation shows a 104.1% advantage, 1772 versus 868. Random string sorting, another memory-heavy test, yields a 196.9% delta with scores of 40557 and 13659.

Single-thread performance is the only area where the Intel part remains competitive. AMD scores 3977, Intel scores 3614, a 10% delta. This indicates that the Intel Core 3 304's single-core design, with its 4.30 GHz boost clock, provides serviceable performance for legacy or single-threaded applications. The AMD part's 5.10 GHz boost clock still takes the lead, but the margin is modest.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this split. AMD's average is 62839, placing it among the top 7% of all CPUs. Intel's average is 13745, ranking in the 32nd percentile. The nearest rivals listed in the database contextualize these results. The AMD part sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 and within 0.2% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX. The Intel Core 3 304 competes with older processors like the Intel Core i7-8750H, trailing it by 0.9%, and the AMD EPYC 7443, trailing by 1.4%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. Core and thread counts show the most visible gap: AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel offers 5 cores and 5 threads. Base clocks differ as well, with AMD at 2.00 GHz and Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks follow a similar pattern: 5.10 GHz for AMD versus 4.30 GHz for Intel.

Thermal design power reflects the performance split. The AMD part has a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part draws 15 W. This makes the Intel processor more suitable for fanless or ultra-portable designs, though the database does not provide real-world power consumption data. The process nodes differ by one nanometer: AMD uses 4 nm at TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm at its own foundry.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. Cache configurations differ as detailed above: AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 total, 2.5 MB L2 total, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory channels differ, with AMD using dual-channel and Intel using single-channel, resulting in 89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

ECC memory support is exclusive to AMD. PCIe lanes favor AMD as well, with 16 Gen 4 lanes versus Intel's 6 Gen 4 lanes. The integrated graphics units differ, with AMD using Radeon 890M and Intel using Xe3 Graphics with one Xe core. The Intel part has a listed launch MSRP of $309, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both are active production parts for the mobile market. The AMD die size is 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, with no multithreading support.

Q: How much faster is the AMD part in single-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD processor scores 3977 in the PassMark single-thread test, while the Intel part scores 3614. This represents a 10% advantage for AMD.

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

A: The largest delta appears in the PassMark integer math test, where AMD scores 117832 versus Intel's 24640, a 378.2% difference.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 304 support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel processor does not support ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 does support ECC memory.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The AMD processor uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel processor uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the Intel Core 3 304's launch MSRP?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has no launch MSRP listed in the database.