Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core 7 251E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 3 304 and Intel Core 7 251E occupy different positions in the database, and the recorded measurements reflect that split. The Core 3 304 has a full benchmark profile with 17 recorded scores, while the Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmark entries in the database. This means the head-to-head comparison is one-sided: the Core 3 304 carries all available performance data, and the Core 7 251E has none to contribute.

The Core 3 304 produces an average benchmark score of 13745 across all measured workloads. That places it at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its closest rival by average score is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, which posts 13786, a margin of -0.3 percent, meaning the Core 3 304 sits essentially level with that processor. Against the Intel Core i7-8750H, the Core 3 304 trails by 0.9 percent (13868 versus 13745). It leads the Intel Core 5 120UL by 1.1 percent (13594 versus 13745) and trails the AMD EPYC 7443 by 1.4 percent (13936 versus 13745). These are small deltas across the board, indicating the Core 3 304 clusters tightly with a broad range of higher-tier chips in overall average score.

Single-thread performance on the Core 3 304 is strong. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it records 1765 points. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 587, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 264. The PassMark single-thread test returns 3614. These figures are consistent with a processor whose boost clock reaches 4.30 GHz, though the database does not break down per-core frequency behavior. The single-thread measurements indicate the Core 3 304 can handle lightly threaded workloads with a level of responsiveness that sits well above its multi-core ranking.

Multi-threaded results on the Core 3 304 are more modest, which aligns with its 5-core, 5-thread configuration. Cinebench R23 multi-core produces 5263 points. Cinebench R20 multi-core produces 4160, and Cinebench R15 multi-core produces 849. The PassMark multi-thread score is 11625. For comparison, the PassMark integer math test returns 24640, floating point math returns 29722, and extended instructions return 9686. These are respectable figures for a 5-thread part, but they do not approach the throughput of the 24-core, 32-thread Core 7 251E, for which no scores exist to confirm that expectation.

Specialized workloads on the Core 3 304 show a mixed picture. Data compression in PassMark records 114775, while data encryption records 8501. Random string sorting records 13659, and the find prime numbers test records 68. Physics simulation records 868. The data compression figure is notably high, suggesting the Core 3 304 handles compression tasks efficiently relative to its other measured areas. The find prime numbers score of 68 is very low, indicating weak performance in that specific integer-heavy workload.

Because the Core 7 251E has no benchmark entries, the database cannot produce a win count for either side in a direct head-to-head. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero. This is not a case of one processor dominating the other in measured tests; it is a case where only one processor has been measured. Any comparative claims about the Core 7 251E must rely on its specifications rather than its benchmark results.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 304 compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The Core 3 304 has an average benchmark score of 13745. It is 0.3 percent behind the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13786), 0.9 percent behind the Intel Core i7-8750H (13868), 1.1 percent ahead of the Intel Core 5 120UL (13594), and 1.4 percent behind the AMD EPYC 7443 (13936).

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 251E have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database shows an empty benchmarks array for the Core 7 251E, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals. The Core 3 304, by contrast, has 17 recorded benchmark scores and an average of 13745.

Q: What is the single-thread performance of the Core 3 304?

A: The Core 3 304 records 1765 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 587 in Cinebench R20 single-core, 264 in Cinebench R15 single-core, and 3614 in PassMark single-thread. These are the highest single-thread measurements available in its profile.

Q: What is the multi-thread performance of the Core 3 304?

A: The Core 3 304 records 5263 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 4160 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, 849 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, and 11625 in PassMark multi-thread. Its PassMark integer math score is 24640, and floating point math is 29722.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The Core 7 251E also has a higher base clock of 2.10 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 4.30 GHz.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The Core 3 304 is listed as Mobile with a 15 TDP, while the Core 7 251E is listed as Desktop with a 65 TDP. They also use different sockets: the Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, and the Core 7 251E uses Intel Socket 1700.

The Verdict

The available data does not support a direct performance verdict between these two processors, because the Core 7 251E has no benchmark scores in the database. The Core 3 304, however, has a complete profile that shows it at the 68th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 13745 and tight margins against several high-end rivals.

For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, the Core 3 304 delivers measured results that are competitive with much larger chips. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1765 and PassMark single-thread score of 3614 put it in a position where lightly threaded applications would see solid performance. The Core 7 251E cannot be compared on this basis, as no single-thread measurements exist for it.

For multi-thread throughput, the Core 3 304 is limited by its 5-core, 5-thread design. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5263 and PassMark multi-thread score of 11625 reflect that limitation. The Core 7 251E, with 24 cores and 32 threads, is architecturally positioned for far higher multi-thread output, but the database contains no numbers to confirm it.

The choice between these two processors depends entirely on whether the user prioritizes a measured profile or a specification-based expectation. The Core 3 304 has proven results across 17 tests and a 68th percentile ranking. The Core 7 251E offers more cores, more threads, a higher boost clock, dual-channel memory, and ECC support, but no recorded performance data. Neither processor has a head-to-head win count, and the database treats them as separate entries with different measurement statuses.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification field. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 304 and 2.10 GHz for the Core 7 251E. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz and 5.60 GHz respectively. TDP is 15 watts for the Core 3 304 and 65 watts for the Core 7 251E.

Sockets differ completely: the Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core 7 251E uses Intel Socket 1700. The Core 3 304 has a 192 KB L1 cache, 2.5 MB L2 cache, and 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Core 7 251E has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3 cache. Memory support also diverges: the Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 7 251E supports ECC memory; the Core 3 304 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core 7 251E provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are different: the Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe), and the Core 7 251E uses UHD Graphics 770. The Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309, and the Core 7 251E has a launch MSRP of $384. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 304 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename and uses a 3 nm process node. Its generation is listed as Core 3 (Wildcat Lake). The Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and a 10 nm process node, with a generation listed as Core 7 (Bartlett Lake). Both are manufactured by Intel.

The die size differs substantially. The Core 7 251E has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while the Core 3 304 has no die size entry in the database. Neither processor has a transistor count listed.

Cache architecture reflects the different design philosophies. The Core 3 304 uses a small shared L3 pool of 6 MB, consistent with a low-power mobile part. The Core 7 251E uses a 36 MB shared L3 cache, consistent with a desktop processor designed for higher throughput. The L1 and L2 layouts also differ: the Core 3 304 reports aggregate L1 of 192 KB and L2 of 2.5 MB, while the Core 7 251E reports per-core L1 of 80 KB and per-core L2 of 2 MB.

The Core 3 304 is a mobile processor with a 15 watt TDP, a single-channel memory bus, and a compact BGA socket. The Core 7 251E is a desktop processor with a 65 watt TDP, a dual-channel memory bus, and a larger LGA socket. The integrated graphics differ in naming and capability tier, with the Xe3 Graphics on the Core 3 304 and UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 7 251E. PCIe generation and lane counts favor the Core 7 251E, which offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the Core 3 304.

Release dates place the Core 7 251E earlier, with a January 2025 launch, while the Core 3 304 is dated April 2026. Both are marked as active in production. The Core 3 304 has a part number of SAE3K, and the Core 7 251E has a part number of SRQDUQ657.