AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and Intel Core 3 305 represent two very different approaches to mobile computing. The database records 17 benchmark comparisons between the two processors, and the AMD part wins all 17. The average benchmark score for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is 43326, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs tracked. The Intel Core 3 305 averages 18302, good for the 72nd percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest single gap appears in PassMark integer math. The AMD chip scores 105056 against 32295 for the Intel part, a 225.3% advantage. That is the largest delta recorded in the entire comparison. Data compression also shows a massive gap: 379448 versus 146857, a 158.4% difference. Extended instructions favor AMD by 132.2%, with scores of 31442 and 13543. Random string sorting shows a 131.4% delta, 40784 versus 17623.

The Cinebench suite tells a consistent story. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD part scores 28424 while the Intel chip manages 13123, a 116.6% difference. Single-core R23 shows the same 116.6% delta, with 4012 versus 1852. Cinebench R20 multicore: 11938 versus 5511, a 116.6% gain. R20 single-core: 1685 versus 777, also 116.6%. Cinebench R15 multicore: 2865 versus 1322, a 116.7% lead. R15 single-core: 404 versus 186, a 117.2% delta. The consistency across every Cinebench version indicates the AMD architecture scales its advantage evenly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

PassMark multithread shows a 107.8% advantage for AMD, 32075 versus 15439. Floating point math: 69580 versus 42284, a 64.6% delta. Data encryption favors AMD by 72.2%, 18978 versus 11019. Physics tests show a 38.8% gap, 1711 versus 1233. Find prime numbers is the closest multi-threaded result at 36.5%, with 157 versus 115.

The narrowest margin in the entire dataset is PassMark single-thread: 3995 versus 3977, a mere 0.5% delta. This is notable because the AMD part wins every benchmark but the single-thread gap is nearly negligible. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz while the Core 3 305 boosts to 4.30 GHz, yet the recorded single-thread scores are almost identical. This suggests the Intel core design is highly efficient per clock in single-threaded work, or that the benchmark saturates differently.

Architecture Differences

The two chips could hardly be more different internally. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, codenamed Strix Halo. It belongs to the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation. The Intel Core 3 305 uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with the Wildcat Lake codename and Core 3 generation label.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads. This means the Intel chip has no hyperthreading or equivalent simultaneous multithreading, a significant disadvantage in heavily threaded workloads. Cache configuration also diverges. The AMD processor has an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 of 1 MB per core, and a shared L3 of 32 MB. The Intel processor lists a total L1 of 192 KB, an L2 of 2.5 MB, and a shared L3 of 6 MB. The AMD part holds a decisive advantage in every cache level, particularly L3 where it has over five times the capacity.

Memory architecture separates the two clearly. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X but over a single-channel bus, with a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. That is a 4.3x difference in theoretical bandwidth, which directly impacts integrated graphics performance and memory-sensitive workloads. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory; the Intel chip does not.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: AMD includes Radeon 8050S graphics, while Intel includes Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP11, Intel uses BGA 1516.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins in every recorded category, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of its advantages rather than any Intel victory. The largest deltas appear in integer math and data compression, suggesting the AMD part is particularly strong in productivity workloads, database operations, and general number crunching. The 225.3% lead in integer math points to applications that process large amounts of discrete data, such as financial simulations, scientific computing, or encryption workloads.

Content creation and rendering favor AMD heavily. The Cinebench results, all above 116% deltas, indicate that 3D rendering, video encoding, and photo editing will run at roughly double the speed on the AMD platform. The multithread advantage of 107.8% aligns with the 16-thread versus 6-thread count, making the AMD part the clear choice for multi-threaded productivity.

The Intel Core 3 305 shows its best relative performance in single-threaded PassMark, where the 0.5% delta makes the two chips effectively tied. This means for very lightly threaded tasks, such as simple web browsing, word processing, or legacy single-core applications, the Intel part is competitive. The find prime numbers test, a 36.5% delta, also narrows the gap somewhat, suggesting the Intel part handles certain algorithmic workloads with reasonable efficiency.

The Intel chip also has a substantially lower TDP at 15 watts versus 55 watts for the AMD part. While the database does not record battery life or thermal performance directly, the TDP figures indicate the Intel part is designed for power-constrained environments. The AMD part's 55-watt TDP suggests it targets performance-tier laptops where cooling and power delivery are less restricted. The Intel part also carries a launch MSRP of $309, while the AMD part has no recorded launch price.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear divergence across nearly every field. Core count: 8 versus 6. Thread count: 16 versus 6. Base clock: 3.60 GHz versus 1.50 GHz. Boost clock: 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. TDP: 55 watts versus 15 watts. Process node: 4 nm versus 3 nm. Foundry: TSMC versus Intel. Cache totals differ as described: L1 is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB total, L2 is 1 MB per core versus 2.5 MB total, L3 is 32 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

Memory support: LPDDR5X only versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bus: quad-channel versus single-channel. Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. ECC support: yes versus no. PCIe: Gen 4 with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes. Integrated graphics: Radeon 8050S versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe). Socket: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel BGA 1516. Release date: 2025-01-05 versus 2026-04-15. Part number: 100-000001422 versus SAE3L. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

The base clock difference is particularly stark: 3.60 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, a 2.4x gap. This reflects the Intel part's low-power design philosophy. The boost clocks are closer at 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz, but the AMD part still holds a 16% advantage. The process node difference favors Intel at 3 nm versus 4 nm, yet the AMD part still delivers far higher performance, indicating that architectural efficiency and core count dominate over process geometry in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average benchmark score of 43326, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 3 305 averages 18302, in the 72nd percentile.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: In PassMark single-thread tests, the AMD part scores 3995 versus 3977 for the Intel part, a 0.5% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part leads by 116.6% with 4012 versus 1852.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 305 uses single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 305 support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel part has no ECC support. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 does support ECC memory.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has a 55-watt TDP. The Intel Core 3 305 has a 15-watt TDP. The Intel part also has a launch MSRP of $309.