AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 vs Intel Core 3 305 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a stark contrast between two mobile processors aimed at very different workloads. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 delivers a 12-core, 24-thread configuration with a 5.00 GHz boost clock, a 64 MB L3 cache, and quad-channel LPDDR5X memory support. The Intel Core 3 305 is a 6-core, 6-thread part with a 4.30 GHz boost clock, a 6 MB shared L3 cache, and single-channel memory support. Benchmark results for the Intel part show it operates in a specific performance tier: its average benchmark score of 18,302 places it at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, with its closest rivals being the Intel Core i3-14100 (0.1% lower score), Intel Core 5 330 (0.2% lower), Intel Core 7 360 (0.4% lower), and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E (0.4% higher). The AMD part, however, has no recorded benchmark scores or nearest rivals in the database, meaning its performance cannot be directly quantified here. The data implies that the Intel Core 3 305 is a validated, mid-tier mobile processor, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 is a higher-core-count, higher-bandwidth part whose measured results are absent, so any verdict must rely strictly on architectural specifications rather than tested outcomes.

Given the absence of AMD benchmark data, the only data-driven verdict is for the Intel Core 3 305: it is a confirmed performer in the 72nd percentile, scoring within 0.4% of its nearest rivals, which indicates a tightly competitive field. For the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490, the data shows a hardware design with double the cores, quadruple the threads, and a much larger cache hierarchy, but without measured scores, the database cannot substantiate any performance claim. Users requiring validated multi-threaded results from the database should look to the Intel part, while those prioritizing raw core counts and memory bandwidth on paper will see the AMD specification as theoretically dominant, but that remains unverified by recorded benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their construction. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 uses the Gorgon Halo codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation built on Zen 5 cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The process node difference (4 nm vs 3 nm) suggests the Intel part uses a denser transistor geometry, though no transistor counts are recorded for either.

Core and thread counts show the largest gap: AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 6 cores and 6 threads. This means the AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading, whereas the Intel part does not, effectively doubling the thread count per core on the AMD side. The cache hierarchy also differs sharply. The AMD processor allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a 64 MB L3 cache. The Intel processor has a single L1 figure of 192 KB, an L2 of 2.5 MB, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD L3 is more than ten times larger, which likely benefits workloads with large working sets.

Memory architecture presents another major split. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 273.1 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 4.6x difference in theoretical bandwidth, which will heavily affect memory-bound tasks. Additionally, the AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), a substantial difference in expansion capability.

Integrated graphics also differ: the AMD part uses a Radeon 8050S, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. No graphics benchmark data is recorded for either, so any comparison remains qualitative. The AMD part has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel part has a TDP of 15 watts, indicating a much higher power envelope for the AMD design. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, and the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1516, so they are not interchangeable. Both are mobile segments, both are active in production, and both have release dates in 2026, with the AMD part dated May 19 and the Intel part dated April 15.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading, doubling the thread count per core.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 delivers 273.1 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core 3 305 delivers 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The AMD part offers roughly 4.6 times the theoretical memory bandwidth.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 has a 64 MB L3 cache. The Intel Core 3 305 has a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD part has a significantly larger L3, which may help with data-heavy workloads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 305 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are their TDP values?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel Core 3 305 has a TDP of 15 watts. The Intel part is designed for a much lower power envelope.

Q: Which processor has recorded benchmark scores?

A: Only the Intel Core 3 305 has benchmark scores in the database, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13,123 and a single-core score of 1,852. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 has no recorded benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 | Intel Core 3 305 |

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Cores | 12 | 6 |

| Threads | 24 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 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 | Gorgon Halo | Wildcat Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max PRO (Zen 5) | Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

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

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (total) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (total) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 273.1 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | True | False |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8050S | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |

| Release Date | 2026-05-19 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $309 |

| Part Number | 100-000002141 | SAE3L |

| Benchmarks | None recorded | 17 recorded scores |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 50 | 72 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 18,302 |

| Nearest Rivals | None recorded | Intel Core i3-14100, Intel Core 5 330, Intel Core 7 360, AMD Ryzen 5 2600E |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. The headToHeadBenchmarks field is empty, and the winsA and winsB counts are both zero. Consequently, a direct numerical comparison using identical tests is impossible from the recorded data.

What can be analyzed is the Intel Core 3 305's standalone benchmark suite, which provides a profile of its capabilities. In Cinebench R15, the Intel part scores 1,322 in multi-core and 186 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5,511 multi-core and 777 single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 13,123 multi-core and 1,852 single-core. These results show a consistent scaling pattern: the multi-core scores are roughly 7.1 times the single-core scores in R15, 7.1 times in R20, and 7.1 times in R23, which aligns with a 6-core processor without multithreading.

PassMark results for the Intel part show a varied workload profile. Integer math scores 32,295, floating point math scores 42,284, and extended instructions score 13,543. Data compression scores 146,857, while data encryption scores 11,019. Find prime numbers scores 115, random string sorting scores 17,623, and physics scores 1,233. The multithread score is 15,439, and the single-thread score is 3,977 (also listed as singlethread with the same value). The data shows the Intel part excels at compression and floating point math relative to its other integer tasks, while prime number finding is notably low.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 has no benchmark entries, so its wins cannot be quantified. The data only indicates its architectural parameters: a higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs 1.50 GHz), a higher boost clock (5.00 GHz vs 4.30 GHz), and a much larger memory bandwidth (273.1 GB/s vs 59.7 GB/s). Based on core count alone, the AMD part would likely score higher in multi-threaded tests, but that is an inference from specifications, not a recorded benchmark result. The database shows zero wins for either side because no shared tests exist.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on recorded data, the Intel Core 3 305 wins in any category that requires validated benchmark scores, as it is the only part with measured results. Its average benchmark score of 18,302 places it at the 72nd percentile, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its score, indicating competitive consistency. In the PassMark suite, the Intel part shows particular strength in data compression (146,857) and floating point math (42,284), suggesting these are favorable workloads for its architecture.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 wins on paper in specification categories where the data is explicit. It has double the cores (12 vs 6), quadruple the threads (24 vs 6), a higher boost clock (5.00 GHz vs 4.30 GHz), a larger L3 cache (64 MB vs 6 MB), and a significantly higher memory bandwidth (273.1 GB/s vs 59.7 GB/s). It also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, such as large data processing or certain scientific computations, the AMD part's quad-channel interface provides a theoretical advantage. For tasks that scale with core count and threads, the AMD part's 24 threads offer a structural benefit over the Intel part's 6 threads.

However, the AMD part's higher TDP (55 W vs 15 W) means it requires more power, which could be a disadvantage in thermally constrained mobile environments. The Intel part, with its lower power envelope, may be preferable for battery-conscious designs. The database also shows the Intel part has a launch MSRP of $309, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, so no pricing comparison is possible.

The use-case split from the data is clear: the Intel Core 3 305 is the only part with proven benchmark performance, so it wins for users who rely on measured results. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 490 wins for users who prioritize core counts, thread counts, cache size, memory bandwidth, and ECC support, all of which are documented specifications. Without AMD benchmark scores, the database cannot confirm whether those specifications translate into actual performance wins, leaving that question open for future measurements.