Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core i7-10750H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core 3 304 wins 11 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i7-10750H takes 6. The margin of victory matters more than the count. The Core 3 304 dominates single-threaded and encryption workloads, while the Core i7-10750H pulls ahead decisively in multi-core rendering and data compression.

The most striking result is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Core 3 304 scores 264 against 138 for the Core i7-10750H, a 91.3% advantage. This is not a small gap; it is a near doubling of performance. The pattern continues in Cinebench R23 single-core, with the Core 3 304 at 1765 versus 1372, a 28.6% lead. PassMark single-thread testing confirms the trend: 3614 for the Core 3 304 versus 2625 for the Core i7-10750H, a 37.7% edge.

Encryption is another landslide for the Core 3 304. PassMark data encryption shows 8501 versus 3930, a 116.3% advantage. Prime number finding also favors the newer chip, 68 versus 39, a 74.4% gap. Floating-point math goes to the Core 3 304 at 29722 versus 25070, an 18.6% win. Physics simulation follows, 868 versus 700, a 24% margin.

The Core i7-10750H fights back with heavy multi-threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core is its largest win: 9718 versus 5263, a 45.8% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core also goes its way, 979 versus 849, a 13.3% lead. PassMark integer math favors the older chip heavily, 39730 versus 24640, a 38% gap. Data compression is another strong point, 167213 versus 114775, a 31.4% win. Random string sorting and extended instructions also go to the Core i7-10750H, with leads of 36.2% and 7.5% respectively.

Two tests are nearly tied. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 4160 for the Core 3 304 versus 4081 for the Core i7-10750H, a 1.9% margin. PassMark multithread is even closer, 11625 versus 11616, a 0.1% difference. These results indicate that the two processors have overlapping multi-threaded capabilities despite very different architectures.

The average benchmark scores place the Core 3 304 at 13745, which sits 0.3% below the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and 0.9% below the Intel Core i7-8750H. The Core i7-10750H averages 13024, landing 0.1% below the Intel Core i5-9400F. Both chips occupy the 68th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they belong to the same overall performance tier, but the distribution of wins tells a different story.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap between these two processors is fundamental. The Intel Core 3 304 uses a 3 nm process node from Intel, while the Core i7-10750H relies on a 14 nm node. This process difference explains much of the single-threaded advantage. The Core 3 304 is built on the Wildcat Lake architecture, whereas the Core i7-10750H uses Comet Lake-H. The newer design allows the Core 3 304 to deliver higher instructions per clock despite a lower boost clock.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Core i7-10750H has 6 cores and 12 threads, using hyper-threading to double its thread count. This explains the multi-core wins for the older chip in Cinebench R23. The Core 3 304 compensates with a smaller L3 cache, 6 MB shared, against 12 MB shared for the Core i7-10750H. L1 cache is 192 KB for the Core 3 304 versus 64 KB per core for the Core i7-10750H. L2 cache is 2.5 MB versus 256 KB per core.

Clock speeds tell a mixed story. The Core 3 304 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Core i7-10750H runs a base clock of 2.60 GHz and boosts to 5.00 GHz. The older chip has higher raw clocks, but the newer architecture delivers more work per cycle. Thermal design power reflects this: the Core 3 304 is rated at 15 W, while the Core i7-10750H draws 45 W. The lower TDP makes the Core 3 304 far more efficient for sustained mobile workloads.

Memory support diverges completely. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7-10750H supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth. The newer chip has higher theoretical bandwidth despite fewer channels, thanks to faster memory standards. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes, the Core i7-10750H offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core on the Core 3 304, versus UHD Graphics on the Core i7-10750H. Neither supports ECC memory. Both use Intel BGA sockets, but the Core 3 304 uses BGA 1516 while the Core i7-10750H uses BGA 1440.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct use cases. The Intel Core 3 304 is the superior processor for single-threaded responsiveness, encryption, and power efficiency. The Intel Core i7-10750H is the better choice for sustained multi-threaded rendering and integer-heavy workloads. For general desktop use, the Core 3 304 delivers a more modern experience: faster application launches, quicker single-core tasks, and dramatically better encryption performance. The 91.3% single-core lead in Cinebench R15 is the defining metric.

For content creation and multi-threaded productivity, the Core i7-10750H wins clearly. The 45.8% advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core is substantial, and the 38% lead in integer math indicates strong performance in compilation, data processing, and similar tasks. The older chip also compresses data 31.4% faster, which benefits file archiving and backup workflows.

The average scores place both in the same percentile, but the user should not mistake this for equivalence. The Core 3 304 wins more tests, and its wins are often larger in percentage terms. The Core i7-10750H wins fewer tests, but its wins concentrate in workloads that scale with thread count. A user who prioritizes battery life, single-core speed, and security workloads should choose the Core 3 304. A user who renders video, compiles code, or processes large datasets should choose the Core i7-10750H.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, the Core i7-10750H has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 2.60 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. TDP is 15 W versus 45 W. The Core 3 304 uses BGA 1516, the Core i7-10750H uses BGA 1440. Process nodes are 3 nm versus 14 nm. Codename is Wildcat Lake versus Comet Lake-H. Cache allocations differ: L1 is 192 KB versus 64 KB per core, L2 is 2.5 MB versus 256 KB per core, L3 is 6 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. Memory support is DDR5 and LPDDR5X versus DDR4. Memory bus is single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s versus 46.9 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics versus UHD Graphics. The Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309; the Core i7-10750H has no recorded launch MSRP. Both have unlocked multipliers set to false, and both are active production parts for the mobile segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 wins every single-core benchmark. It leads by 91.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 28.6% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 37.7% in PassMark single-thread tests.

Q: Which processor is better for multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-10750H wins the most demanding multi-threaded tests. It leads by 45.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 13.3% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, though the Core 3 304 wins Cinebench R20 multi-core by 1.9%.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, with no hyper-threading. The Core i7-10750H has 6 cores and 12 threads, using hyper-threading to double thread count.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Core 3 304 is rated at 15 W TDP, while the Core i7-10750H is rated at 45 W TDP. The Core 3 304 uses significantly less power.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7-10750H supports DDR4 with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both processors currently in production?

A: Yes, both are marked as Active production status. The Core 3 304 was released in 2026, while the Core i7-10750H was released in 2020.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 304 wins in single-threaded performance, encryption, prime number finding, floating-point math, physics simulation, and PassMark multithread. The 91.3% single-core lead in Cinebench R15 makes it the obvious choice for responsive everyday computing. Encryption performance at 116.3% ahead suggests secure communications and file encryption tasks complete more than twice as fast. Floating-point math at 18.6% ahead and physics at 24% ahead indicate better performance in scientific simulations and game physics. The 15 W TDP also makes it the preferred option for thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is limited.

The Intel Core i7-10750H wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, Cinebench R15 multi-core, integer math, data compression, random string sorting, and extended instructions. The 45.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core makes it the better choice for video rendering and 3D modeling. Integer math at 38% ahead supports code compilation and database operations. Data compression at 31.4% ahead benefits file archiving and backup tools. The 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also give it more expansion capability for discrete GPUs and NVMe storage.

The close results in Cinebench R20 multi-core and PassMark multithread suggest that for moderately threaded workloads, either chip performs similarly. The Core 3 304 edges out a 1.9% win in Cinebench R20 and a 0.1% win in PassMark multithread, but these margins are within noise. Users with mixed workloads should weigh the single-threaded responsiveness of the Core 3 304 against the raw multi-threaded throughput of the Core i7-10750H. The data supports the Core 3 304 for most general-purpose tasks, while the Core i7-10750H remains a specialist for heavy multi-threaded applications.