Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core 3 304 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core 3 201E and Intel Core 3 304 serve completely different markets, and the benchmark data makes the separation clear. The 201E wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every multi-core workload, while the 304 wins only 4 tests, all in single-thread or specialized math areas. The 201E delivers an average benchmark score of 19056, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, while the 304 scores 13745 on average, landing in the 68th percentile. The 201E is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with 4 cores and 8 threads, a 60 W TDP, and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The 304 is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1516 with 5 cores and 5 threads, a 15 W TDP, and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The 304 does hold a meaningful single-core edge in Cinebench R15 (264 vs 179, a 32.2% advantage) and in PassMark single-thread tests (3614 vs 3482, a 3.7% advantage), but its multi-core performance falls far behind. The 201E is the choice for desktop workloads that need sustained parallel throughput, while the 304 suits ultra-mobile, low-power platforms where its 15 W envelope and 3 nm process matter more than raw multi-core scores. The 304's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, sits just 0.3% ahead in average score, while the 201E's closest competitor, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, is statistically tied at 0% delta. Neither chip is unlocked for overclocking, and both are currently in active production.

Where Each One Wins

The 201E dominates in all multi-threaded rendering and compute workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 12613 versus the 304's 5263, a massive 139.7% advantage. The gap in Cinebench R15 multi-core is 49.7% (1271 vs 849), and in R20 multi-core it leads by 27.3% (5297 vs 4160). PassMark multithread shows a 27.6% lead (14839 vs 11625). The 201E also wins integer math by 78.1% (43894 vs 24640), data compression by 43% (164160 vs 114775), physics by 31.5% (1141 vs 868), random string sorting by 30.2% (17783 vs 13659), floating point math by 11.9% (33260 vs 29722), extended instructions by 13.9% (11035 vs 9686), and data encryption by 5.1% (8931 vs 8501). These are all multi-core or memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks where the 201E's 8 threads and 12 MB of shared L3 cache provide a decisive edge over the 304's 5 threads and 6 MB of shared L3.

The 304 wins in Cinebench R15 single-core by 32.2% (264 vs 179), in PassMark single-thread by 3.7% (3614 vs 3482), and in PassMark find prime numbers by 16.2% (68 vs 57). The R15 single-core result is notable because the 304's boost clock is lower (4.30 GHz vs 4.80 GHz), yet its 3 nm process and newer architecture deliver a higher single-thread score in that specific test. The 304 also wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test by a narrow 0.8% (1780 vs 1765), though the head-to-head table records the 201E as the winner there because the delta is computed from the 201E's perspective. In practice, the two are nearly identical in R23 single-core. The 304's wins are concentrated in light, latency-sensitive workloads, not sustained parallel processing.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different process nodes and design families. The 201E uses Intel's 10 nm process and the Bartlett Lake codename, while the 304 uses a 3 nm process and the Wildcat Lake codename. Both are built by Intel, but the 3 nm node gives the 304 a significant manufacturing advantage in power efficiency, which explains its 15 W TDP versus the 201E's 60 W TDP. The die size of the 201E is 163 mm², while the 304's die size is not recorded in the database.

Core counts differ fundamentally. The 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning all cores support hyper-threading. The 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, with no hyper-threading, so each core maps to exactly one thread. Cache hierarchies also differ. The 201E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The 304 has 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The 201E's larger L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB) helps in workloads with large working sets, while the 304's per-core L1 and L2 allocations are larger relative to its core count.

Memory support diverges sharply. The 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, delivering 76.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The 304 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a single-channel configuration, with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The 201E also supports ECC memory, while the 304 does not. The 201E uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, whereas the 304 uses PCIe Gen 4 with only 6 CPU lanes. The 201E has UHD Graphics 730 integrated graphics; the 304 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The 201E is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, and the 304 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516. The 201E launched on January 12, 2025, while the 304 launched on April 15, 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E wins every multi-core benchmark in the head-to-head set. The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 12613 versus the 304's 5263, a 139.7% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 304 have any performance advantages?

A: Yes. The 304 wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 32.2% (264 vs 179), PassMark single-thread by 3.7% (3614 vs 3482), and PassMark find prime numbers by 16.2% (68 vs 57). It also edges out the 201E in Cinebench R23 single-core by 0.8% (1780 vs 1765) from the 304's perspective, though the head-to-head table credits the 201E with a 0.8% win because the delta is measured from the 201E's side.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The 201E has a TDP of 60 W, while the 304 has a TDP of 15 W. The 304's 3 nm process node enables this significantly lower power envelope.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 3 201E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 304 does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The 304 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a single-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 201E has an average benchmark score of 19056, which places it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. The 304 has an average score of 13745, placing it in the 68th percentile. The 201E sits closest to the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS at 0% delta, while the 304 sits closest to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at -0.3% delta.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the largest gap between the two processors. The 201E scores 12613, which is 139.7% higher than the 304's 5263. This result reflects the 201E's 8 threads, 12 MB of shared L3 cache, and 76.8 GB/s dual-channel memory bandwidth versus the 304's 5 threads, 6 MB of shared L3, and 59.7 GB/s single-channel bandwidth. The R23 multi-core score is more than double, making the 304 unsuitable for sustained rendering workloads.

Integer math shows a similarly one-sided result. The 201E scores 43894 in PassMark integer math, a 78.1% advantage over the 304's 24640. Data compression also favors the 201E by 43% (164160 vs 114775). The 201E leads in PassMark multithread by 27.6% (14839 vs 11625), in physics by 31.5% (1141 vs 868), in random string sorting by 30.2% (17783 vs 13659), in floating point math by 11.9% (33260 vs 29722), in extended instructions by 13.9% (11035 vs 9686), and in data encryption by 5.1% (8931 vs 8501). Cinebench R20 multi-core gives the 201E a 27.3% win (5297 vs 4160), and R15 multi-core gives a 49.7% win (1271 vs 849).

The 304's most decisive win is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 264 versus the 201E's 179, a 32.2% advantage. This is surprising given the 201E's higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus the 304's 4.30 GHz. The 304's newer 3 nm architecture and different cache layout likely explain the result. In PassMark single-thread, the 304 wins by 3.7% (3614 vs 3482). In PassMark find prime numbers, the 304 wins by 16.2% (68 vs 57). The Cinebench R23 single-core test is nearly a tie, with the 201E scoring 1780 and the 304 scoring 1765, a 0.8% delta in the 201E's favor. The 304 also wins the duplicate PassMark single-thread test by the same 3.7% margin (3614 vs 3482).

The 201E wins 13 tests, the 304 wins 4 tests. The magnitude of the 201E's wins in multi-core tests (up to 139.7%) far exceeds the magnitude of the 304's wins in single-core tests (up to 32.2%). In terms of average benchmark score, the 201E leads by 5311 points (19056 vs 13745), a 38.6% advantage. The 201E's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, is within 0.1% of its average score, while the 304's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, sits 0.3% ahead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every physical and electrical specification. The 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads; the 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The 201E's base clock is 3.60 GHz, while the 304's base clock is 1.50 GHz. The 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz, the 304 to 4.30 GHz. TDP is 60 W for the 201E and 15 W for the 304. The 201E uses Intel Socket 1700; the 304 uses Intel BGA 1516. The 201E's codename is Bartlett Lake, the 304's is Wildcat Lake. The process node is 10 nm for the 201E and 3 nm for the 304. The 201E has a die size of 163 mm²; the 304's die size is not recorded.

Cache configurations are completely different. The 201E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The 304 has 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support: the 201E accepts DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth; the 304 accepts only DDR5 and LPDDR5X in single-channel mode with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the 201E but not on the 304. PCIe connectivity: the 201E has Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, the 304 has Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics: the 201E has UHD Graphics 730, the 304 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. Market segment: desktop for the 201E, mobile for the 304. Release dates: the 201E launched on January 12, 2025, and the 304 on April 15, 2026. The 201E's launch MSRP is $134, and the 304's launch MSRP is $309. The 201E part number is SRVTR, the 304 is SAE3K. Both processors are locked (multiplier unlocked: false), and both are in active production. The 201E's generation is listed as Core 3 (Bartlett Lake), the 304's as Core 3 (Wildcat Lake).