Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core 7 160HL Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the Intel Core 3 304 and the Intel Core 7 160HL shows two processors aimed at different segments despite sharing the Intel brand. The Core 3 304 is a mobile processor with 5 cores and 5 threads, built on a 3 nm process, while the Core 7 160HL is a desktop processor with 14 cores and 20 threads on a 10 nm process. The Core 3 304 has an average benchmark score of 13745 and sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs, whereas the Core 7 160HL has no recorded benchmark scores and an average score of 0, placing it at the 50th percentile. For workloads measured by Cinebench and PassMark, the Core 3 304 is the only one with data, making it the clear choice for users who need quantifiable performance. The Core 7 160HL offers more cores, threads, and a higher boost clock, but without benchmark results, its practical performance cannot be assessed from the database. The data indicates that the Core 3 304 is the better-documented option for mobile computing, while the Core 7 160HL is positioned for desktop tasks requiring higher core counts and faster memory bandwidth, but its actual scores remain unknown.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their underlying designs. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with a 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. It integrates 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning there is no hyper-threading, and each core operates as a single thread. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, and its PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 6 lanes available from the CPU. The part is designed for the mobile market segment, uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, and has a production status of Active. Its release date is recorded as April 15, 2026, with a launch MSRP of $309.

The Intel Core 7 160HL uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename, belonging to the Raptor Lake architecture, and is built on a 10 nm process. It has 14 cores and 20 threads, indicating a hybrid configuration with performance and efficiency cores that enable multi-threading on some cores. Its cache layout is per-core: 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5 through a dual-channel memory bus, though no memory bandwidth figure is recorded. The integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, a significantly larger GPU than the Core 3 304. The PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 8 lanes. This processor targets the desktop market, uses the Intel Socket 1700, and has an Active production status. Its release date is April 7, 2024, and no launch MSRP is listed in the database.

Key differences include the process node (3 nm versus 10 nm), core count (5 versus 14), thread count (5 versus 20), base and boost clocks, cache sizes and organization, memory type and channel configuration, integrated graphics capabilities, socket, market segment, and release timeline. The Core 3 304 is a newer, more power-efficient design for mobile, while the Core 7 160HL is a higher-core-count desktop part with dual-channel memory and more PCIe lanes.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 160HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, compared to the Intel Core 3 304's 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Core 3 304 boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Core 7 160HL boosts to 5.20 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, both have ECC memory set to false in the database.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Core 3 304 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core 7 160HL has no memory bandwidth figure listed.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 watts, whereas the Core 7 160HL has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Are there benchmark scores available for the Core 7 160HL?

A: No, the database shows an empty benchmarks array for the Core 7 160HL, with an average benchmark score of 0.

Specification Differences

The specification comparison highlights several distinct fields where the two processors differ. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Core 7 160HL has 14 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks differ: 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 304 versus 2.50 GHz for the Core 7 160HL. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz and 5.20 GHz, respectively. TDP is 15 watts for the Core 3 304 and 45 watts for the Core 7 160HL. The sockets are different: Intel BGA 1516 for the mobile part and Intel Socket 1700 for the desktop part. Process nodes are 3 nm versus 10 nm. Cache configurations differ substantially: the Core 3 304 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3, while the Core 7 160HL has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Core 3 304, versus DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 7 160HL. Memory bus is single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s for the Core 3 304, with no figure for the Core 7 160HL. PCIe lanes are 6 for the Core 3 304 and 8 for the Core 7 160HL. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe versus Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. Market segments are Mobile versus Desktop. Release dates are April 15, 2026, versus April 7, 2024. The Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the Core 7 160HL has none recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain head-to-head benchmark results between the two processors. The headToHeadBenchmarks field is empty, and winsA and winsB are both zero. However, the Core 3 304 has a full set of benchmark scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 849, and in single-core it scores 264. Cinebench R20 multicore yields 4160, while single-core is 587. Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 5263, with single-core at 1765. Passmark tests show data compression at 114775, data encryption at 8501, extended instructions at 9686, prime number finding at 68, floating point math at 29722, integer math at 24640, multithread at 11625, physics at 868, random string sorting at 13659, and single-thread at 3614. The average benchmark score is 13745, placing the Core 3 304 at the 68th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX with an average score of 13786 and a delta of -0.3%, the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868 with a delta of -0.9%, the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594 with a delta of 1.1%, and the AMD EPYC 7443 at 13936 with a delta of -1.4%. These deltas indicate that the Core 3 304 performs within 1.4% of these competitors, slightly ahead of the Core 5 120UL and slightly behind the others. Since the Core 7 160HL has no benchmark data, no direct comparison can be made. The data shows that the Core 3 304 is competitive with much higher-tier processors in the database, which is notable given its modest core count. The Core 7 160HL's lack of scores means any performance claims would be speculative, and the database records no evidence of its computing capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 304 wins in every category where measurements exist, simply because it is the only processor with recorded benchmark results. It delivers quantifiable performance in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 across both multicore and single-core tests, as well as in Passmark's suite covering data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tasks. Its average benchmark score of 13745 and 68th percentile ranking indicate it outperforms a majority of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 304 also wins on efficiency, with a 15-watt TDP and a 3 nm process node, making it suitable for mobile applications where power consumption is a priority. Its memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s and support for LPDDR5X provide a fast memory interface for its class.

The Intel Core 7 160HL wins on raw specifications that suggest capability for heavier workloads, despite having no benchmark scores. It has more cores (14 versus 5) and more threads (20 versus 5), which typically indicates better multi-threaded performance, though the database does not confirm this. Its boost clock of 5.20 GHz is higher than the Core 3 304's 4.30 GHz, and its base clock of 2.50 GHz is also higher. The larger 24 MB shared L3 cache, compared to 6 MB, gives it more on-die storage for frequently accessed data. Dual-channel memory support with DDR4 and DDR5 offers potential bandwidth advantages over the single-channel Core 3 304, though no bandwidth figure is recorded. The Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units is a more substantial integrated GPU than the Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, making it better suited for graphics tasks. The desktop socket and 45-watt TDP allow for higher sustained performance in a non-portable context. The Core 7 160HL also has more PCIe lanes (8 versus 6), which could support more expansion devices.

In summary, the Core 3 304 wins in documented performance and efficiency, while the Core 7 160HL wins on specification-based potential for high-core-count and graphics-intensive workloads. Users requiring verified benchmark results should select the Core 3 304; users needing a desktop processor with more cores and a larger GPU, based on specifications alone, would look to the Core 7 160HL, but the database offers no evidence of its actual performance.