AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 across all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Core 3 304 registering zero wins. The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 109588 against 24640, a 344.8% advantage. This result reflects the substantial difference in raw compute throughput between the two mobile processors.

Cinebench results reinforce the same pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18759 versus 5263 for the Core 3 304, a 256.4% gap. The older Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a 238.3% delta, with scores of 2872 and 849 respectively. These multi-threaded workloads benefit from the AMD processor's 8 cores and 16 threads, compared to the Intel part's 5 cores and 5 threads.

Single-core performance tells a closer story, though the AMD chip still leads. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 posts 1960 against 1765, an 11% advantage. PassMark single-thread results show 4185 versus 3614, a 15.8% delta. The boost clock difference contributes here, with the AMD part reaching 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz for the Intel chip.

Memory-intensive workloads amplify the gap further. PassMark data compression shows 400887 for the AMD part versus 114775 for the Intel chip, a 249.3% difference. Random string sorting follows with 43196 against 13659, a 216.2% delta. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388's quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the Core 3 304's single-channel setup at 59.7 GB/s explains much of this divergence.

Extended instruction workloads also favor AMD heavily. PassMark extended instructions score 32719 versus 9686, a 237.8% margin. Floating-point math shows 72722 against 29722, a 144.7% advantage. Data encryption results in 20092 versus 8501, a 136.3% delta. Even the prime number finding test, which often favors simpler architectures, shows a 113.2% edge for the AMD chip with 145 versus 68.

The average benchmark score in the database places the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 at 49796, which sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 304 averages 13745, landing in the 68th percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 9 273PE at 49845 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49394 (0.8% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (1.2% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196 (1.2% behind). For the Intel chip, the closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13786 (0.3% ahead), the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868 (0.9% ahead), the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594 (1.1% behind), and the AMD EPYC 7443 at 13936 (1.4% ahead).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins every recorded benchmark category, but the magnitude of its victories varies by workload type. The largest deltas appear in integer math (344.8%), multi-core Cinebench (256.4%), and data compression (249.3%). These results indicate that the AMD processor delivers its strongest performance in compute-heavy, parallelizable tasks where its 8 cores, 16 threads, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache can be fully utilized.

The Intel Core 3 304 shows its best relative performance in single-core tests. The smallest margins for the AMD part appear in Cinebench R23 single-core (11%) and Cinebench R15 single-core (12.9%). This suggests that while the Intel chip cannot match the AMD processor's peak single-thread performance, the gap narrows considerably when only one core is active. The Core 3 304's 4.30 GHz boost clock, while lower than the AMD part's 5.00 GHz, still provides competent single-thread execution for everyday tasks.

PassMark physics results show a 112.3% delta, with 1843 for AMD versus 868 for Intel. This moderate margin, compared to the larger multi-threaded gaps, indicates that the physics workload does not scale perfectly with core count, but the AMD chip still maintains a solid lead. The Intel processor's 15 W TDP suggests a focus on efficiency rather than raw performance, and the data reflects that trade-off.

For workloads like data encryption (136.3% delta) and floating-point math (144.7% delta), the AMD part maintains substantial but not extreme advantages. These tests show the Ryzen AI Max+ 388's balanced compute capabilities across different instruction types. The Intel Core 3 304 does not win any category in the recorded data, so its role appears limited to lighter tasks where its lower power draw and smaller footprint may be advantageous.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. AMD fabricates the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while Intel builds the Core 3 304 on a 3 nm process at its own foundry. The AMD chip uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename, part of the Ryzen AI Max generation. The Intel part uses the Wildcat Lake codename in the Core 3 generation, though the database does not list a specific architecture name for it.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The AMD processor has 8 cores and 16 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel chip has 5 cores and 5 threads, with no hyperthreading indicated. Cache hierarchies also diverge: the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Core 3 304 offers 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3.

Memory architecture presents a major differentiator. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth with ECC support enabled. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but only over a single-channel bus, providing 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC capability. This memory bandwidth gap directly influences the large performance deltas in memory-sensitive benchmarks like data compression and string sorting.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics vary as well: the AMD processor includes a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel chip features Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, whereas the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1516. Both processors have locked multipliers and target the mobile market segment.

Power characteristics separate the two clearly. The AMD processor has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel chip operates at 15 W TDP. This 40 W difference indicates the AMD part targets performance-first mobile systems, while the Intel chip suits power-constrained designs. The die size for the AMD part is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel chip's die size is not recorded in the database.

Release timing also differs. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a release date of January 5, 2026, while the Core 3 304 arrives later on April 15, 2026. Both processors are marked as Active in production status. The Intel chip carries a launch MSRP of $309, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

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

A: The AMD part provides 256.0 GB/s over quad-channel LPDDR5X, while the Intel chip delivers 59.7 GB/s over single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18759, which is 256.4% higher than the Intel Core 3 304's 5263.

Q: Does the Intel processor offer ECC memory support?

A: No, the Intel Core 3 304 does not support ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 does.

Q: What are the TDP values for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a 55 W TDP, and the Intel Core 3 304 has a 15 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 304 boosts to 4.30 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 | Intel Core 3 304 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 5 |

| Threads | 16 | 5 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Wildcat Lake |

| 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 | 32 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $309 |

| Part Number | 100-000001980 | SAE3K |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |