AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The AMD part also has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 4.30 GHz.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 25,265 versus 5,263 for the Intel Core 3 304, a 380% advantage. The PassMark multi-thread test shows a similar story: 41,732 versus 11,625, a 259% delta.

Q: Is the single-core performance also in AMD's favor?

A: Yes, but the margin is much narrower. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD scores 1,857 versus 1,765 for Intel, a 5.2% lead. PassMark single-thread shows 3,958 versus 3,614, a 9.5% advantage.

Q: What are the power and platform differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has a TDP of 55 W and uses AMD Socket FL1. The Intel Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 W and uses Intel BGA 1516. The AMD part also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes, while the Intel chip supports PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX supports DDR5 dual-channel memory with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but only single-channel, with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the processors rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX sits at the 94th percentile, while the Intel Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile. The AMD part's average benchmark score is 71,797, compared to 13,745 for the Intel chip.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a decisive split. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins all 13 head-to-head tests recorded in the database. Its average benchmark score of 71,797 places it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, with nearest rivals like the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF (71,910, only 0.2% higher) and the Intel Xeon 6724P (72,396, 0.8% higher). This is a high-end mobile processor competing with server-class silicon.

The Intel Core 3 304, with an average score of 13,745, sits in the 68th percentile. Its nearest rivals are far less demanding parts: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13,786, 0.3% higher), the Intel Core i7-8750H (13,868, 0.9% higher), and the Intel Core 5 120UL (13,594, 1.1% lower). The data indicates this is a low-power, entry-level mobile chip, not a performance part.

The verdict from the data: the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is for workloads that demand heavy multi-threaded throughput, while the Intel Core 3 304 is for systems where the 15 W TDP and single-channel memory simplicity take priority. Nothing in the recorded benchmarks suggests the Intel part can match the AMD chip in raw compute. The AMD processor's 380% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 494.6% lead in PassMark integer math are not close calls.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin appears in PassMark integer math. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 146,506 versus 24,640 for the Intel Core 3 304, a 494.6% delta. This test typically scales strongly with core count, and the 12-core, 24-thread AMD part has a structural advantage over the 5-core, 5-thread Intel chip.

Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 380% lead for the AMD part (25,265 versus 5,263). This is the most widely cited multi-threaded render test in the database, and the gap is consistent with the core and thread disparity. Data compression follows at 332.5% (496,427 versus 114,775), and random string sorting at 324.4% (57,971 versus 13,659).

The encryption and extended instruction tests show similar patterns. PassMark data encryption scores 29,919 for AMD versus 8,501 for Intel, a 251.9% delta. Extended instructions show 36,527 versus 9,686, a 277.1% delta. Prime number finding, a test sensitive to integer throughput, shows 304 versus 68, a 347.1% delta.

The floating-point math test shows a smaller but still massive gap: 86,747 versus 29,722, a 191.9% delta. Physics simulation scores 2,185 versus 868, a 151.7% delta. Multi-thread overall shows 41,732 versus 11,625, a 259% delta.

The narrowest margins are in single-threaded tests. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the AMD part a 5.2% lead (1,857 versus 1,765). PassMark single-thread shows a 9.5% lead (3,958 versus 3,614). These results indicate that per-core performance is similar between the two architectures, and the multi-core dominance comes primarily from having more than twice the cores and nearly five times the threads.

Specification Differences

The core counts differ substantially: 12 cores and 24 threads for the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX versus 5 cores and 5 threads for the Intel Core 3 304. The AMD part has no simultaneous multi-threading on the Intel side to compensate, as the Intel chip's thread count equals its core count.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The base clock is 2.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and the boost clock is 5.10 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. The AMD processor also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel chip is locked.

Cache allocation differs. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. The Intel Core 3 304 uses 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The L3 cache difference is particularly large: 64 MB versus 6 MB.

Memory support diverges on channel count and bandwidth. The AMD part runs dual-channel DDR5 at 83.2 GB/s. The Intel part runs single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X at 59.7 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX provides PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core 3 304 provides PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only).

The process nodes differ: TSMC 5 nm for AMD versus Intel 3 nm for the Intel chip. The AMD part reports 13,140 million transistors on a 2x 71 mm² die. The Intel part's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The integrated graphics also differ. The AMD part uses Radeon 610M. The Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe).

The release dates are close: the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX launched on 2025-04-22, and the Intel Core 3 304 on 2026-04-15. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $309. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, part of the 8000 series. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 13,140 million transistors on a dual-die design of 2x 71 mm². The Zen 4 architecture relies on a chiplet layout, which the die size data reflects.

The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename under the Core 3 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The transistor count and die size are absent from the database, but the process node is more advanced than AMD's.

The cache hierarchy reveals different design philosophies. AMD provides per-core L1 and L2 caches (64 KB and 1 MB per core) with a large shared 64 MB L3. Intel provides a smaller L3 at 6 MB shared, with 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 as aggregate figures. The AMD part's larger L3 is consistent with its server-derived Dragon Range heritage.

The memory controller differs in channel width, which affects bandwidth. The AMD part's dual-channel DDR5 interface delivers 83.2 GB/s. The Intel part's single-channel interface delivers 59.7 GB/s. This is a 39.4% bandwidth advantage for the AMD chip, a meaningful gap for memory-intensive workloads.

PCIe capability also reflects the different positioning. The AMD part supports PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes, suitable for discrete GPUs and NVMe storage. The Intel part supports PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes, indicating a more limited expansion path.

The Intel Core 3 304 integrates Xe3 graphics with one Xe core. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX integrates Radeon 610M graphics. Neither part's iGPU is benchmarked in the head-to-head data, so the relative graphics performance is not recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins every recorded benchmark. The areas where the margin is largest point to its intended use cases. Integer math (494.6% lead), Cinebench R23 multi-core (380% lead), prime number finding (347.1% lead), data compression (332.5% lead), and random string sorting (324.4% lead) all favor the AMD part by huge margins. These workloads respond directly to core count and memory bandwidth, and the AMD chip has more of both.

Multi-threaded rendering is a clear strength. The 380% Cinebench R23 multi-core lead means the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is the choice for CPU-bound rendering tasks, video encoding, and any workload that scales across 24 threads. The 24-thread count versus 5 threads is the dominant factor.

The AMD part also wins the single-threaded tests, but by smaller margins. The 5.2% Cinebench R23 single-core lead and 9.5% PassMark single-thread lead mean that for lightly threaded applications, the two processors are closer. Still, the AMD chip is ahead in every recorded metric.

The Intel Core 3 304 has no benchmark wins to claim. Its strengths lie outside the recorded compute tests. The 15 W TDP versus 55 W suggests a power envelope suited to fanless or ultra-portable designs. The single-channel memory and 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes indicate a minimal platform footprint. The 3 nm process node and Intel Xe3 Graphics point to an integrated, low-power design.

The data does not support a compute-based use case for the Intel Core 3 304. Its 68th percentile ranking and nearest rivals (Intel Core i7-8750H, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, Intel Core 5 120UL, AMD EPYC 7443) are all older or lower-tier parts. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX, at the 94th percentile, competes with Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF and Xeon-class processors.

The use-case split is therefore clear. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is for multi-threaded compute, content creation, and any task where the 24 threads and 64 MB L3 cache can be utilized. The Intel Core 3 304 is for low-power, compact mobile systems where the 15 W TDP and integrated Xe3 graphics matter more than raw throughput. The benchmark results do not suggest any overlap in their intended performance envelopes.