AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380, which takes 9 of the 11 compared benchmarks. The Intel Core 3 305 secures only 2 wins, both in specific compute tasks. The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 79,789 against 32,295, a 147.1% advantage. That result indicates a substantial gap in general arithmetic workloads, likely reflecting the combination of simultaneous multithreading and higher sustained clocks.

Data compression favors the AMD processor almost as decisively. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 scores 293,595 versus 146,857 for the Intel Core 3 305, a 99.9% difference. This workload, which exercises memory bandwidth and cache efficiency, aligns with the AMD platform's 128.0 GB/s memory bandwidth compared to 59.7 GB/s for the Intel part. The AMD chip also leads in extended instructions with 24,333 against 13,543, a 79.7% margin, and in random string sorting with 31,153 versus 17,623, a 76.8% difference.

Multithreaded performance shows a 57% lead for the AMD processor, scoring 24,244 against 15,439. That result is consistent with the thread count difference: the Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 supports 12 threads from 6 cores, while the Intel Core 3 305 supports only 6 threads from 6 cores. Floating point math also goes to the AMD part, 53,084 versus 42,284, a 25.5% advantage. Data encryption shows a 31.6% lead for the AMD processor, with 14,502 against 11,019.

The Intel Core 3 305 takes the prime number finding test with 115 versus 75, a 34.8% advantage for Intel. This result is notable because it is the only benchmark where the Intel chip wins by a double-digit margin. Physics simulation also goes to Intel, 1,233 versus 1,120, a 9.2% edge. These two wins suggest the Intel architecture has strengths in specific branch-heavy or latency-sensitive workloads despite its overall lower throughput.

Single-thread performance is nearly identical. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 scores 3,995, and the Intel Core 3 305 scores 3,977, a 0.5% difference in favor of AMD. Both chips deliver comparable per-core performance in this metric, which is surprising given the different clock profiles. The AMD part boosts to 4.90 GHz, while the Intel chip boosts to 4.30 GHz, but the Intel architecture compensates partially through its 3 nm process node.

The average benchmark score for the AMD processor is 48,171, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 3 305 averages 18,302, which sits in the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the AMD chip include the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A at 48,201 (0.1% higher) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX at 48,287 (0.2% higher). The AMD Ryzen 9 3900 scores 47,918 (0.5% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D scores 47,908 (0.5% lower). These deltas indicate the Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 performs on par with a range of higher-tier desktop and mobile processors despite its mobile market segment.

For the Intel Core 3 305, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18,318 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core 5 330 at 18,345 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core 7 360 at 18,374 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 18,230 (0.4% lower). The tight grouping around 18,300 shows the Core 3 305 sits in a competitive segment where small margins separate entries.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 dominates workloads that benefit from parallel execution and high memory throughput. Data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, floating point math, integer math, multithreaded tasks, and random string sorting all favor the AMD chip. The 128.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 16 MB shared L3 cache provide substantial headroom for data-intensive operations. The 6-core, 12-thread configuration allows the processor to keep more instructions in flight, which shows in the 57% multithread lead.

The Intel Core 3 305 wins in prime number finding and physics simulation. These workloads typically involve branch prediction and dependent instruction chains rather than pure memory bandwidth. The Intel chip's 192 KB L1 cache and 2.5 MB L2 cache, while smaller in aggregate than the AMD cache configuration, may offer lower latency per core. The 3 nm process node also contributes to efficiency, though the recorded data does not isolate that factor directly. The physics score of 1,233 versus 1,120 indicates a 9.2% advantage for Intel in this specific algorithm.

For general productivity, the AMD processor is the clear choice based on the aggregate data. The 90th percentile ranking versus 72nd percentile places the two chips in different performance tiers. The nearest rival comparison confirms this: the AMD part competes with Intel Core Ultra 5 class processors, while the Intel Core 3 305 competes with Core i3 and lower-tier Core 5 parts.

The single-thread results are effectively tied, meaning the Intel chip's wins come from architectural efficiency in specific instruction patterns rather than raw speed. The AMD chip's wins come from broader throughput capabilities. Users running mixed workloads would see the AMD advantage compound across multiple benchmarks, while users running only the two specific winning workloads might not notice a difference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 averages 48,171, while the Intel Core 3 305 averages 18,302.

Q: How does single-thread performance compare?

A: The AMD processor scores 3,995 in PassMark single-thread tests, and the Intel processor scores 3,977, a 0.5% difference in favor of AMD.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the AMD processor scores 79,789 versus 32,295 for Intel, a 147.1% difference.

Q: Which workloads does the Intel Core 3 305 win?

A: The Intel chip wins in PassMark find prime numbers (115 versus 75, a 34.8% advantage) and PassMark physics (1,233 versus 1,120, a 9.2% advantage).

Q: How do the two chips rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 ranks in the 90th percentile, and the Intel Core 3 305 ranks in the 72nd percentile.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: For the AMD chip, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A (0.1% higher), Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX (0.2% higher), AMD Ryzen 9 3900 (0.5% lower), and AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D (0.5% lower). For the Intel chip, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-14100 (0.1% higher), Intel Core 5 330 (0.2% higher), Intel Core 7 360 (0.4% higher), and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E (0.4% lower).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several fundamental specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD base clock is 3.60 GHz versus 1.50 GHz for Intel, and the boost clock is 4.90 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. Thermal design power differs significantly: 55 for AMD versus 15 for Intel.

Memory support varies. The AMD chip uses LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD processor supports ECC memory; the Intel processor does not.

PCIe lane allocation differs: the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the AMD chip uses Radeon 8040S, and the Intel chip uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe).

The release dates are distinct. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 was released on 2025-01-05, and the Intel Core 3 305 was released on 2026-04-15. The launch MSRP for the Intel chip is $309; no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD chip.

The sockets are different: AMD Socket FP11 for the AMD part and Intel BGA 1516 for the Intel part. The part numbers are 100-000001425 for AMD and SAE3L for Intel. Both processors have locked multipliers and are in the mobile market segment with active production status.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 uses the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Halo, part of the Ryzen AI Max PRO (Zen 5) generation. The process node is 4 nm from TSMC. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename from the Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) generation, built on a 3 nm process node from Intel. No architecture name is recorded for the Intel part.

Cache configurations show structural differences. The AMD chip has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The Intel chip has 192 KB L1 total, 2.5 MB L2 total, and 6 MB shared L3. The AMD cache is organized per core, while the Intel cache figures appear as aggregate totals. The AMD L3 is 16 MB shared, which is larger than the Intel 6 MB shared L3.

Memory architecture separates the two clearly. The AMD processor features dual-channel LPDDR5X with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Intel processor features single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The dual-channel versus single-channel distinction directly explains the 2.1x memory bandwidth advantage for the AMD part.

The integrated graphics differ in branding and configuration. AMD uses Radeon 8040S, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe unit. The PCIe configuration also differs: 16 Gen 4 lanes for AMD versus 6 Gen 4 lanes for Intel. These differences affect external device connectivity and data throughput for GPUs or storage.

The process node difference (4 nm TSMC versus 3 nm Intel) may explain part of the Intel chip's lower thermal design power of 15 versus 55 for AMD. The higher TDP for the AMD chip enables higher clock speeds and more sustained multithreaded performance, as reflected in the benchmark results. The Intel chip's lower TDP suits thinner mobile designs, while the AMD chip targets higher-performance mobile workloads.

The release cadence also differs: the AMD part launched in January 2025, and the Intel part launched in April 2026. This timing difference places the Intel chip in a later generation window, yet the benchmark data shows the AMD chip still holds a substantial performance advantage in most measured workloads. The single-thread scores are nearly identical despite the later release date and smaller process node for the Intel part.

The cache hierarchy reflects different design philosophies. AMD's per-core L1 and L2 with a large shared L3 suits multithreaded workloads with shared data. Intel's larger aggregate L1 and L2 but smaller L3 may favor single-threaded or branch-heavy workloads, which matches the Intel wins in prime number finding and physics simulation. The 16 MB L3 on the AMD chip provides more room for caching working sets, contributing to the 99.9% data compression advantage.