AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX vs Intel Core 3 N350 Comparison

The Intel Core 3 N350 and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX sit at opposite ends of the CPU landscape: one is a 7-watt mobile part built for efficiency, the other a 280-watt workstation processor built for throughput. Both are active products in the database, and both land in a surprisingly similar position in the overall rankings, with the Core 3 N350 at the 66th percentile of all recorded CPUs and the Threadripper PRO 5945WX at the 65th. That overlap in percentile placement is where the similarity ends, as the direct comparison data shows a clean sweep for the AMD chip across every shared benchmark.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers six Cinebench tests spanning three generations of the suite, and the result is uniform: the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX wins all six, each time by a margin of 81.7 percent.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Threadripper records 3447 points against 632 for the Core 3 N350. The single-core gap in the same suite is identical in relative terms: 486 versus 89 points, again an 81.7 percent difference. Moving to Cinebench R20 does not change the picture. The 5945WX posts 14365 points multi-core and 2027 points single-core, while the N350 manages 2635 and 371 respectively. Cinebench R23, the most demanding of the three suites, stretches the absolute gap the widest: 34204 versus 6274 points in multi-core, and 4828 versus 885 points in single-core.

Two things stand out in this data. First, the Threadripper's advantage is not confined to heavily threaded rendering workloads where its 24 threads would naturally dominate; it leads by the same relative margin in single-core tests, where its 4.50 GHz boost clock and large cache hierarchy overwhelm the N350's 3.90 GHz boost. Second, the consistency of the delta, identical at 81.7 percent across all six tests, indicates the gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The 5945WX is simply operating at a higher performance level in every measured scenario.

The database adds context beyond the direct matchup. The Threadripper PRO 5945WX also carries Geekbench results of 13371 multi-core and 2059 single-core, tests for which the N350 has no recorded score. Within the broader comparison set, the 5945WX sits within one percent of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X (0.7 percent ahead) and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280M (1 percent ahead), while trailing the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 by 0.6 percent and the Intel Atom x7835RE by 0.9 percent on average score. The Core 3 N350's own neighborhood is similarly tight: it is 2 percent ahead of the Intel Core i7-3770 and 2.3 percent ahead of the Intel Core i5-1035G1, while sitting 2.5 percent behind the AMD EPYC 7F52 and 3.2 percent behind the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280. In other words, both chips cluster near the mid-60th percentile of the database, but the N350 gets there on efficiency-class silicon while the 5945WX gets there on workstation-class throughput.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity: in any workload resembling the Cinebench tests, the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX is the faster processor by a wide and uniform margin. If rendering, simulation, or sustained multi-core compute is the priority, the recorded results indicate the 5945WX delivers roughly five and a half times the performance of the N350 in every measured category, single-threaded work included.

The Core 3 N350's case rests entirely on characteristics the benchmark scores do not capture directly. Its 7-watt TDP against the 5945WX's 280-watt TDP represents a fortyfold difference in thermal envelope, which shapes the platforms each chip can inhabit: the N350 is a mobile-segment BGA 1264 part soldered to its board, while the 5945WX requires the server and workstation-oriented Socket WRX8. The N350 also integrates UHD Graphics 770, where the Threadripper has no integrated graphics at all and assumes a discrete GPU in the system.

Platform capability further separates them. The 5945WX offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes and eight-channel DDR4 with ECC support and 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The N350 provides 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes and a single-channel memory bus delivering 38.4 GB/s, though it does support DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. Workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, peripheral expansion, or error-correcting memory point squarely at the Threadripper. Workloads that depend on power draw, physical footprint, or integrated graphics point at the N350. Neither chip offers an unlocked multiplier, so neither can close the performance gap through overclocking.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX. It wins all six shared Cinebench tests by 81.7 percent each, including single-core tests, where it scores 486 versus 89 in R15, 2027 versus 371 in R20, and 4828 versus 885 in R23.

Q: How do the two compare in thread counts?

A: The 5945WX has 12 cores and 24 threads. The N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no hyper-threading recorded, so the Threadripper has triple the thread count.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: No. The 5945WX supports ECC on its eight-channel DDR4 bus. The N350 does not support ECC.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: The Core 3 N350, with Intel UHD Graphics 770. The Threadripper PRO 5945WX has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: How do their clock speeds compare?

A: The 5945WX has a base clock of 4.10 GHz and boosts to 4.50 GHz. The N350 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and boosts to 3.90 GHz, meaning the Threadripper boosts higher and sustains a far higher base frequency.

Q: Where does each rank against all CPUs in the database?

A: The N350 sits at the 66th percentile with an average benchmark score of 9903, while the 5945WX sits at the 65th percentile with an average score of 9348, so their overall percentile placement is nearly identical despite the lopsided direct comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. Cores and threads: 8/8 for the N350 versus 12/24 for the 5945WX. Base clock: 0.10 GHz versus 4.10 GHz. Boost clock: 3.90 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. TDP: 7 watts versus 280 watts. Socket: Intel BGA 1264 versus AMD Socket WRX8. Process node: 10 nm at Intel versus 7 nm at TSMC. The 5945WX is also specified at 16,600 million transistors across a die configuration of 4x 81 mm², figures for which the N350 has no recorded equivalents.

Cache is another sharp divider. The N350 carries 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The 5945WX carries 64 KB of L1 per core but 512 KB of L2 per core and 64 MB of L3, over ten times the last-level cache. Memory support differs in kind as well: DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 on a single-channel bus for the N350 at 38.4 GB/s, versus DDR4-only but eight-channel at 204.8 GB/s for the Threadripper. PCIe differs in both generation and scale, Gen 3 with 9 lanes against Gen 4 with 128 lanes. Market segment, production intent, and release dates diverge too: the N350 is a mobile chip released on January 6, 2025, while the 5945WX is a server and workstation chip released on March 7, 2022. Part numbers are SRPNS and 100-000000448 respectively, and both lack an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 N350 is built on Intel's Twin Lake architecture, part of the Core 3 generation derived from the Alder Lake-N lineage, fabricated on Intel's own 10 nm process. Its design emphasizes efficiency: a low base clock of 0.10 GHz that ramps to 3.90 GHz only when thermals allow, a lean cache hierarchy, and integrated UHD Graphics 770 on the same package. The 10 nm node and the BGA packaging both reflect the priority of fitting a complete, low-power compute solution into thin mobile systems.

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX is a different animal entirely. Codenamed Chagall PRO, it implements AMD's Zen 3 architecture on TSMC's 7 nm process in a multi-chip configuration of four 81 mm² dies totaling 16,600 million transistors. Its cache design follows the Zen 3 pattern of large per-core L2 (512 KB) and a substantial 64 MB of L3, feeding twelve cores and twenty-four threads. The WRX8 platform brings eight-channel DDR4 with ECC and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, connectivity built for professional GPU and storage expansion rather than mobile integration.

In short, the architecture data explains the benchmark data. The 5945WX's higher clocks, deeper caches, doubled thread count, and memory subsystem built for bandwidth produce the uniform 81.7 percent lead across every Cinebench generation in the database. The N350's Twin Lake design concedes that ground deliberately, trading absolute performance for a thermal envelope and feature set suited to mobile hardware, and the recorded results show exactly what that trade costs in rendering and compute throughput.