AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a nearly one-sided contest. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins 13 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 3 305 wins only 2. The AMD part dominates every multi-threaded workload by margins ranging from 89.2% to 359.8%. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with 64 MB of shared L3 cache, deliver massive throughput advantages in rendering, encryption, compression, and mathematical workloads. The Intel Core 3 305, with 6 cores and 6 threads, cannot compete in any parallel processing scenario.

The Intel part's only victories come in the two single-thread PassMark tests, where it scores 3977 versus AMD's 3967, a margin of only 0.3%. This is a narrow, almost negligible lead, but it does indicate that Intel's 3 nm process and Wildcat Lake architecture produce competitive single-thread performance despite the massive core count disadvantage. The AMD part still wins the Cinebench single-core tests, with a 6.7% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and a 62.9% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core, though the R23 margin is relatively small.

The use-case split is clear: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is for workloads that scale with core count and cache, such as video rendering, 3D modeling, data compression, and scientific computing. The Intel Core 3 305 is for light, single-threaded tasks where its efficiency and modest power draw might be preferable, but the data shows it only wins by a hair in two specific tests. The overall average benchmark score reinforces this: AMD sits at 63765 (93rd percentile), while Intel sits at 18302 (72nd percentile). The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900KS (delta -0.4%) and AMD EPYC 7343 (delta -0.7%), placing it in high-end desktop territory. The Intel part's nearest rivals are budget and mid-range parts like the Intel Core i3-14100 (delta -0.1%) and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E (delta 0.4%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins every multi-threaded benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 24828 against Intel's 13123, a 89.2% lead. In PassMark multi-thread, it scores 42912 against 15439, a 177.9% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 305 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Intel part wins the PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread tests, both scoring 3977 versus AMD's 3967, a 0.3% margin. These are the only two wins for Intel out of 15 head-to-head tests.

Q: How do their single-core Cinebench scores compare?

A: The AMD part leads in both Cinebench single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD scores 303 versus Intel's 186, a 62.9% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD scores 1976 versus Intel's 1852, a 6.7% lead.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where AMD scores 148508 versus Intel's 32295, a 359.8% lead. The next largest is in PassMark data compression, with AMD at 506170 versus Intel's 146857, a 244.7% lead.

Q: How does the AMD part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has an average benchmark score of 63765. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-13900KS, scores 64051, a delta of -0.4% (AMD slightly behind). The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G scores 63331, a delta of 0.7% (AMD slightly ahead).

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 305 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 has an average benchmark score of 18302. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i3-14100, scores 18318, a delta of -0.1% (Intel slightly behind). The AMD Ryzen 5 2600E scores 18230, a delta of 0.4% (Intel slightly ahead).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results establish the overall hierarchy. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 scores 3918 against Intel's 1322, a 196.4% lead. This is nearly triple the performance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD scores 24828 against 13123, an 89.2% lead. The single-core Cinebench tests show a closer contest: R15 single-core has AMD at 303 versus Intel's 186 (62.9% lead), while R23 single-core has AMD at 1976 versus 1852 (6.7% lead). The R23 single-core margin is modest, but AMD still takes the win.

The PassMark suite amplifies the multi-threaded dominance. PassMark integer math shows the starkest divide: AMD scores 148508, Intel scores 32295, a 359.8% difference. This indicates that the AMD part's integer arithmetic capabilities are more than four times higher in this test. PassMark data compression follows closely: AMD at 506170 versus Intel's 146857, a 244.7% lead. PassMark extended instructions shows AMD at 40888 versus 13543, a 201.9% lead. PassMark random string sorting has AMD at 55248 versus 17623, a 213.5% lead. PassMark find prime numbers shows AMD at 323 versus 115, a 180.9% lead.

Other PassMark results continue the pattern. PassMark multi-thread has AMD at 42912 versus 15439, a 177.9% lead. PassMark data encryption shows AMD at 26027 versus 11019, a 136.2% lead. PassMark physics has AMD at 2773 versus 1233, a 124.9% lead. PassMark floating point math shows AMD at 94666 versus 42284, a 123.9% lead. The only Intel wins are in the two identical PassMark single-thread tests, where Intel scores 3977 and AMD scores 3967, a 0.3% difference.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in core configuration. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. This means the AMD part has double the cores and four times the thread count. The base clock differs significantly: AMD runs at 3.20 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. The boost clock also favors AMD: 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. Thermal design power (TDP) shows a major gap: AMD is rated at 55 watts, Intel at 15 watts. This reflects the AMD part's higher performance ceiling and the Intel part's efficiency focus.

Memory support and bandwidth also diverge sharply. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but with a single-channel bus, delivering only 59.7 GB/s. This is a 4.3 times bandwidth advantage for AMD, which directly impacts memory-heavy workloads. The AMD part also supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not. PCIe lanes differ: AMD has Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), Intel has Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, Intel uses Intel BGA 1516.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's L3 cache is over 10 times larger. Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 8050S, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe). Release dates are separated by over a year: AMD released on 2025-01-05, Intel on 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $309, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It is part of the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process by Intel itself, and belongs to the Core 3 generation. The process node difference (4 nm versus 3 nm) explains part of the Intel part's efficiency advantage, but the AMD part compensates with a much larger core count and cache.

The AMD part's Zen 5 architecture is designed for high-throughput computing, with simultaneous multithreading (24 threads from 12 cores) and a large shared L3 cache of 64 MB. This architecture targets heavy multi-threaded workloads and AI-related tasks, as indicated by its Ryzen AI branding. The Intel part's Wildcat Lake architecture appears to be an efficiency-focused design, with 6 cores and no multithreading (6 threads), a small 6 MB L3 cache, and a 15-watt TDP. It targets low-power mobile devices where battery life and thermals take priority over raw performance.

Memory architecture reinforces the design philosophy difference. The AMD part's quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is essential for feeding 12 cores and a large cache. The Intel part's single-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s is sufficient for 6 cores and lighter workloads. The AMD part also includes ECC support, which is absent on the Intel part, suggesting AMD targets reliability-sensitive applications. The integrated graphics also differ: AMD's Radeon 8050S versus Intel's Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded.

The Verdict

The data directs a straightforward choice. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is the superior processor for any workload that benefits from multiple cores, large cache, or high memory bandwidth. It wins 13 of 15 benchmarks, with leads as large as 359.8% in integer math and 244.7% in data compression. Its average benchmark score of 63765 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900KS and AMD EPYC 7343, both high-end parts. The AMD part is also the only one with ECC memory support and a 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, which suits data-heavy and reliability-focused tasks.

The Intel Core 3 305 is the choice for extremely light single-threaded workloads, where it edges out AMD by 0.3% in PassMark single-thread tests. Its 15-watt TDP and 3 nm process make it a low-power option, and its 6 MB L3 cache and single-channel memory reflect a modest scope. Its average benchmark score of 18302 places it in the 72nd percentile, and its nearest rivals are budget parts like the Intel Core i3-14100 and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E. The Intel part's single-thread win is marginal, and it loses every multi-threaded test by at least 89.2%.

For users who need rendering, compression, encryption, physics simulation, or any parallel computation, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 delivers between 1.9 and 4.6 times the performance of the Intel Core 3 305. For users who prioritize minimal power draw and only run single-threaded applications, the Intel Core 3 305 offers a negligible 0.3% advantage in two specific tests. The benchmark record does not support any other conclusion: the AMD part is the performance leader by a wide margin, while the Intel part is a low-power alternative with a single narrow win.