AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison here is complicated by the fact that the database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has no recorded benchmark scores at all, while the Intel Core 3 304 has a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results. This means the measurable performance data exists entirely on the Intel side, and the AMD part's capabilities must be inferred from its architectural specifications rather than from direct testing.

The Intel Core 3 304 delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5263 and a single-core score of 1765. In Cinebench R20, it scores 4160 multi-core and 587 single-core, while in Cinebench R15 it reaches 849 multi-core and 264 single-core. These results show a processor that scales reasonably across different rendering workloads, with the single-core scores remaining consistent relative to the multi-core figures across all three Cinebench versions.

PassMark results for the Intel Core 3 304 show a multi-thread score of 11625 and a single-thread score of 3614. The integer math test produces 24640, floating point math reaches 29722, and extended instructions score 9686. Data compression hits 114775, data encryption reaches 8501, and random string sorting scores 13659. The physics test returns 868, while the find prime numbers test yields just 68, a notably low figure that suggests this workload is not a strength for the architecture.

The Intel processor's average benchmark score is 13745, placing it at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX with an average score of 13786, a delta of -0.3 percent, meaning the Intel part trails that processor by a negligible margin. The Intel Core i7-8750H scores 13868, a delta of -0.9 percent, again a very close comparison. The Intel Core 5 120UL scores 13594, which the Core 3 304 beats by 1.1 percent. The AMD EPYC 7443 scores 13936, a delta of -1.4 percent, meaning the Core 3 304 sits just below that server chip.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, which reflects the absence of recorded measurements rather than actual performance. With 12 cores and 24 threads, a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, the specifications suggest a substantially more capable multi-threaded processor than the Intel part, which has only 5 cores and 5 threads with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost of 4.30 GHz. The lack of benchmark data for the AMD chip means these architectural advantages cannot be quantified in test scores, but the core count difference alone points toward a major multi-threaded gap.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 304 wins in every category where recorded data exists, simply because it is the only one of the two with measurements. Its 15 W TDP positions it as a low-power mobile processor, and the recorded scores reflect that segment. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1765 and PassMark single-thread score of 3614 indicate a design that handles lightly threaded tasks competently, while the multi-core scores of 5263 in Cinebench R23 and 11625 in PassMark show the limits of its 5-core, 5-thread configuration.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D, despite having no benchmark scores, presents specifications that would likely dominate in heavily threaded workloads. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with a 128 MB L3 cache, are characteristics of a processor aimed at embedded and workstation tasks that require substantial parallel processing. The 120 W TDP and dual-die design with a 4 nm process node from TSMC further indicate a high-performance part rather than an efficiency-focused one.

The cache hierarchy tells a clear story. The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3, while the Intel part has 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD processor's 128 MB L3 cache is more than twenty times larger than the Intel chip's 6 MB, which would give it a significant advantage in workloads that reuse data sets, such as database processing, scientific simulations, and certain rendering tasks. The Intel part's smaller cache suggests it is better suited to lighter, more latency-sensitive workloads where power efficiency matters more than raw throughput.

Memory support also separates the two. The AMD processor uses DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a single-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which is critical for embedded and server-like environments where data integrity is paramount. The Intel chip does not support ECC. These differences reinforce the AMD part's positioning as a compute-focused embedded processor, while the Intel chip targets mobile and low-power applications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, part of the 9000 series. It uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC and contains 16,630 million transistors across a dual-die design with each die measuring 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and a 3 nm process node from Intel itself, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

The AMD processor operates on the AMD Socket AM5 platform and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU. The Intel processor uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, which is a soldered mobile package, and supports PCIe Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. This is a substantial difference in expansion capability, with the AMD part offering four times the PCIe lanes and a newer generation of the interface.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD chip has 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part has 5 cores and 5 threads with no hyper-threading. The AMD processor's base clock of 4.40 GHz is nearly three times the Intel chip's 1.50 GHz base clock, and its 5.50 GHz boost clock exceeds the Intel part's 4.30 GHz boost by a significant margin. These clock and core-count differences combine to create a massive theoretical throughput gap.

The Intel Core 3 304 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core as its integrated graphics, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D includes Radeon Graphics. Neither integrated solution is likely to be a primary selling point for these processors, but their presence means both can operate in systems without a discrete GPU.

The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, making it suitable for overclocking, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD chip carries the part number 100-000001368E and was released on October 6, 2025. The Intel part carries the part number SAE3K and was released on April 15, 2026. The AMD processor is marked as part of the desktop market segment, while the Intel chip is marked as mobile.

The Verdict

The recorded data strongly favors the Intel Core 3 304 in terms of measurable performance, but this is entirely due to the absence of benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D. The Intel part's average benchmark score of 13745 places it at the 68th percentile, and its nearest rival comparisons show it performing within 1.4 percent of processors like the AMD EPYC 7443 and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. Those are serious server and workstation chips, and the Core 3 304's proximity to them in average score is noteworthy.

However, the AMD processor's specifications suggest it would outperform the Intel part substantially in multi-threaded workloads if benchmarked. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, 128 MB of L3 cache, dual-channel DDR5 memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC support all point toward a processor designed for demanding embedded workloads. The 4 nm process from TSMC and 16,630 million transistors indicate a high transistor density and modern design.

The Intel part's strengths lie in efficiency and single-threaded performance relative to its power envelope. Its 15 W TDP is one-eighth of the AMD processor's 120 W TDP, making it suitable for fanless or low-power designs. Its 3 nm process node from Intel is also a newer node than AMD's 4 nm, though the AMD part's higher clocks and core count suggest it uses its power budget for performance rather than efficiency.

For applications requiring maximum parallel computation, large cache capacity, ECC memory, and extensive PCIe connectivity, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D is the only choice based on its specifications. For applications requiring low power consumption, a compact BGA package, and lighter workloads, the Intel Core 3 304 is the only option with recorded performance data. The database cannot confirm the AMD part's actual benchmark performance, so any judgment about its real-world speed remains speculative.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 has an average benchmark score of 13745 and sits at the 68th percentile. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, reflecting the absence of recorded benchmark data.

Q: Does the AMD processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 304 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the TDP values for these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has a TDP of 120 W, while the Intel Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 304 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 trails the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by 0.3 percent, trails the Intel Core i7-8750H by 0.9 percent, beats the Intel Core 5 120UL by 1.1 percent, and trails the AMD EPYC 7443 by 1.4 percent in average benchmark score.

Q: What memory configurations do the two processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D supports DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a single-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D | Intel Core 3 304 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 5 |

| Threads | 24 | 5 |

| Base Clock | 4.40 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | Not recorded |

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

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

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

| L3 Cache | 128 MB | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

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

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2025-10-06 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $309 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | 100-000001368E | SAE3K |

| Series | 9000 series | Not recorded |

| Generation | Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5 (Granite Ridge)) | Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) |