3 305 vs EPYC 9115
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9115 outperforms Core 3 305 by a whopping 223% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 238 | 1085 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 23.61 | 12.26 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 9.43 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Turin (2024) | Wildcat Lake (2026) |
| Release date | 10 October 2024 (1 year ago) | 16 April 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $726 | $309 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 9115 has 93% better value for money than Core 3 305.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 16,630 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | SP5 | Intel BGA 1516 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9115 and Core 3 305.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 6 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 28.28 | 8.76 |
| Recency | 10 October 2024 | 16 April 2026 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 6 |
| Threads | 32 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 15 Watt |
EPYC 9115 has a 223% higher aggregate performance score, and 167% more physical cores and 433% more threads.
Core 3 305, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 33% more advanced lithography process, and 733% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 9115 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 3 305 in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 9115 is a server/workstation processor while Core 3 305 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
