AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 delivers a dominant multi-threaded and compute-heavy performance profile, while the Intel Core 3 305 counters with a minor single-thread edge and a far lower thermal envelope. The data confirms the AMD part as the clear choice for intensive workloads, with the Intel chip suited for efficiency-focused, lightly threaded tasks.

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into distinct performance tiers. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins 9 of the 11 head-to-head comparisons, often by massive margins. Its PassMark average benchmark score of 90541 places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 3 305 scores 18302, landing in the 72nd percentile. The AMD chip’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 654 (delta of -0.2%) and AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (delta of -0.7%), indicating it competes with high-end desktop and workstation silicon. The Intel Core 3 305’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-14100 (delta of -0.1%) and Intel Core 5 330 (delta of -0.2%), positioning it as a mainstream entry-level part. Users needing heavy compute, content creation, or data processing should select the Ryzen AI Max+ 392. Users prioritizing minimal power draw and adequate single-thread performance for basic tasks should consider the Core 3 305.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². It features 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process from Intel, with 6 cores and 6 threads (no hyper-threading). Its base clock is 1.50 GHz and boost clock is 4.30 GHz. It has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC memory support. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth without ECC. The AMD chip uses an AMD Socket FP11 with PCIe Gen 4 and 16 lanes, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1516 with PCIe Gen 4 and 6 lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part has a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel part has Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 shows its largest advantage in integer math, scoring 152414 against the Core 3 305’s 32295, a delta of 371.9%. Data compression follows a similar pattern: 554760 versus 146857, a 277.8% delta. Random string sorting favors the AMD chip by 237.6% (59487 versus 17623), and extended instructions show a 237.2% delta (45666 versus 13543). The AMD part leads in multithread performance with a score of 45231 versus 15439, a 193% delta. Data encryption shows a 152.1% delta (27784 versus 11019), and find prime numbers shows a 178.3% delta (320 versus 115). Floating point math and physics also favor the AMD chip, with deltas of 135.4% (99548 versus 42284) and 134.1% (2887 versus 1233), respectively.

The sole wins for the Intel Core 3 305 come in single-thread tests. It scores 3977 in passmark_single_thread versus 3927 for the AMD part, a delta of -1.3%. The identical result appears in the passmark_singlethread test. This indicates the Intel chip’s higher single-core frequency efficiency, despite its lower boost clock of 4.30 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, gives it a slight edge in lightly threaded workloads. The AMD part’s wins across all other metrics, often by triple-digit percentages, show its 12-core, 24-thread configuration with 64 MB of L3 cache vastly outperforms the 6-core, 6-thread Intel part in any parallel or compute-intensive task.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD base clock is 3.20 GHz versus 1.50 GHz for Intel, and the AMD boost clock is 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. The AMD TDP is 55 watts, the Intel TDP is 15 watts. The AMD part uses a 4 nm TSMC process, the Intel part uses a 3 nm Intel process. Cache configurations differ significantly: the AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, while the Intel part has 192 KB total L1 and 2.5 MB total L2. The AMD L3 cache is 64 MB shared, the Intel L3 is 6 MB shared. Memory support differs: AMD uses LPDDR5X only with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, Intel uses DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part but not the Intel part. PCIe lanes differ: 16 lanes on AMD versus 6 lanes on Intel. The integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S on AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) on Intel. Release dates differ: the AMD part launched on 2026-01-05, the Intel part on 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $309; the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. Both parts are active in production, neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 wins the passmark_single_thread test with a score of 3977 versus 3927 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392, a delta of -1.3% in favor of Intel.

Q: How large is the multithread performance gap?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45231 in passmark_multithread versus 15439 for the Intel Core 3 305, a 193% delta in favor of AMD.

Q: What are the TDP figures for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel Core 3 305 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 305 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses a quad-channel memory bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins decisively in every compute-heavy category. Data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread performance, physics, and random string sorting all favor the AMD part. The largest deltas are in integer math (371.9%), data compression (277.8%), and random string sorting (237.6%). This makes the AMD chip the appropriate choice for workloads such as scientific computing, large-scale data processing, video rendering, and any application that scales across many threads. Its 24 threads and 64 MB of L3 cache provide the resources needed for parallel tasks.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins only in the two single-thread tests, with a 1.3% margin over the AMD part. This gives it a narrow advantage in applications that rely on a single core’s performance, such as legacy software, basic office tasks, or simple web browsing. Its 15-watt TDP also makes it far more power-efficient than the AMD part’s 55-watt TDP, which is a significant factor for battery life in thin-and-light laptops. The Intel chip’s 3 nm process and lower clocks contribute to this efficiency. The AMD part’s 5.00 GHz boost clock does not translate to a single-thread win, as the Intel part’s architecture delivers a higher score at 4.30 GHz. For users who prioritize raw performance and are willing to accept higher power consumption, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the superior choice. For users who need modest performance with maximum efficiency, the Intel Core 3 305 is the data-supported option.