Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core 5 213PTE Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark database shows a decisive performance separation between these two Intel parts. The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins every single head-to-head benchmark, 17 out of 17, with the narrowest margin being a 2.8% lead in single-threaded PassMark testing. The Intel Core 3 304 does not claim a single victory in any recorded test. The Core 5 213PTE sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 304 sits in the 68th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core 5 213PTE is 32924, which is roughly 2.4 times the Core 3 304's average of 13745. The data indicates the Core 5 213PTE is the correct choice for any workload where raw compute throughput matters, while the Core 3 304 is the part for low-power mobile integration where the performance deficit is acceptable. The Core 3 304 carries a launch MSRP of $309, while the Core 5 213PTE has a launch MSRP of $221.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 3 304 wins nowhere in the recorded benchmark suite. Its only meaningful advantage is structural rather than performance-based: it is a mobile part with a 15 W TDP, while the Core 5 213PTE is a desktop part with a 45 W TDP. The Core 3 304 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, which is a soldered mobile platform, whereas the Core 5 213PTE uses the Socket 1700 desktop platform. For a compact, battery-conscious mobile design, the Core 3 304 is the only viable option of the two. For everything else, the Core 5 213PTE dominates.

The Core 5 213PTE wins by large margins in all multi-threaded tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 213PTE scores 21751 against 5263, a 75.8% lead. In PassMark integer math, it scores 93109 against 24640, a 73.5% lead. The single-threaded gap is much smaller but still favors the Core 5 213PTE in every test. The data shows that users running rendering, encryption, compression, or physics workloads should choose the Core 5 213PTE without hesitation.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families and are built on different process nodes. The Core 3 304 is a Wildcat Lake part built on a 3 nm process. It has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. Its base clock is 1.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Core 5 213PTE is a Bartlett Lake part built on a 10 nm process. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, so it offers simultaneous multi-threading. Its base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

The cache layouts differ substantially. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 213PTE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 213PTE's total L3 is four times larger than the Core 3 304's, which contributes to its strong multi-threaded performance.

Memory support also separates the two. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core 5 213PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core 5 213PTE also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 304 does not. PCIe connectivity favors the Core 5 213PTE with Gen 5 and 16 CPU lanes, while the Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Core 5 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 3 304 is a mobile part released in April 2026, while the Core 5 213PTE is a desktop part released in March 2026. Both are active production parts with locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE is faster in every multi-threaded benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 21751 versus 5263 for the Core 3 304, a 75.8% advantage. In PassMark multithread, it scores 25590 versus 11625, a 54.6% advantage.

Q: Is the Core 3 304 competitive in single-threaded performance?

A: The Core 3 304 is closer but still behind. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1765 versus 3070, a 42.5% gap. In PassMark single-thread, the gap narrows to 2.8%, with 3614 against 3718.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus. The Core 5 213PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and has higher memory bandwidth at 76.8 GB/s compared to 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Does the Core 5 213PTE support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core 5 213PTE supports ECC memory. The Core 3 304 does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, so it lacks simultaneous multi-threading.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each processor?

A: The Core 3 304 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, which is a mobile soldered platform. The Core 5 213PTE uses the Intel Socket 1700 desktop socket.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest victory for the Core 5 213PTE comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Core 5 213PTE scores 21751, while the Core 3 304 scores 5263, a 75.8% lead. This is the single biggest delta in the entire head-to-head set. The second-largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the Core 5 213PTE scores 93109 against 24640, a 73.5% lead. These two results show that the Core 5 213PTE's extra cores and threads translate directly into heavy compute workloads.

The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a 54.5% lead for the Core 5 213PTE, with 9135 against 4160. The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a 61.3% lead, with 2192 against 849. PassMark floating-point math favors the Core 5 213PTE by 58.6%, with 71722 against 29722. PassMark physics shows a 60.5% lead, with 2199 against 868. PassMark data compression shows a 56% lead, with 261083 against 114775. PassMark random string sorting shows a 54.6% lead, with 30106 against 13659.

The smaller gaps appear in single-threaded tests. PassMark single-thread gives the Core 5 213PTE a 2.8% lead, with 3718 against 3614. Cinebench R15 single-core gives it a 14.6% lead, with 309 against 264. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 54.5% lead, with 1289 against 587, which is an outlier compared to the other single-threaded tests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 42.5% lead, with 3070 against 1765.

Encryption and extended instruction workloads also favor the Core 5 213PTE. PassMark data encryption shows a 41% lead, with 14413 against 8501. PassMark extended instructions shows a 40% lead, with 16146 against 9686. PassMark find prime numbers shows a 56.7% lead, with 157 against 68.

The nearest rival data provides context for each part. The Core 3 304's average score of 13745 sits close to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13786 (0.3% behind), the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868 (0.9% behind), and the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594 (1.1% ahead). The Core 5 213PTE's average score of 32924 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-12700 at 32942 (0.1% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H at 32812 (0.3% ahead). The Core 5 213PTE also sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G. This places the Core 5 213PTE in a much higher performance tier than the Core 3 304, which aligns with the 83rd versus 68th percentile ranking.

The benchmark data is consistent across all 17 tests. There is no test where the Core 3 304 outperforms the Core 5 213PTE, and there is no test where the margin is close enough to suggest the Core 3 304 could close the gap with better cooling or power delivery. The Core 5 213PTE has higher clocks, more cores, more threads, more cache, and a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 3 304 has a smaller process node and a much lower TDP, but the performance cost is severe. The two parts serve different market segments, and the recorded data shows no overlap in their performance envelopes.