Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core i7-14650HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance advantage for the Intel Core i7-14650HX across every single recorded test. The Core i7 wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with the Core 3 304 failing to secure a single victory. The margin of victory varies substantially by workload type, ranging from a modest 5.9% in single-threaded tasks to a commanding 78.9% in integer math operations.

The largest deltas appear in multi-core and throughput-oriented benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i7-14650HX scores 20,454 against 5,263 for the Core 3 304, a deficit of 74.3% for the smaller chip. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar pattern, with the Core i7 posting 3,470.5 versus 849, a 75.5% gap. The PassMark integer math test delivers the widest spread: 116,661 for the Core i7 versus 24,640 for the Core 3, representing a 78.9% difference.

Data compression and random string sorting also highlight the multi-threaded gap. The Core i7 reaches 398,418 in PassMark data compression, while the Core 3 manages 114,775, a 71.2% shortfall. In random string sorting, the Core i7 scores 43,035 against 13,659, a 68.3% deficit. Floating point math shows the Core i7 at 84,999 versus 29,722, a 65% gap, while the multithread score favors the Core i7 by 65.3% (33,495 versus 11,625).

The single-core results are far closer, though the Core i7 still leads in every case. PassMark single-thread scores show 3,841 for the Core i7 against 3,614 for the Core 3, a 5.9% edge. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Core i7 a 10.4% advantage (1,969 versus 1,765). The smallest delta is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Core i7 leads by just 7.5% (285.5 versus 264). Other single-thread tests show the Core i7 ahead by 65.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core (1,686 versus 587), which is an outlier compared to the other single-core results, likely reflecting the Core i7's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz against 4.30 GHz.

Intermediate gaps appear in extended instructions, physics, encryption, and prime number finding. PassMark extended instructions show the Core i7 at 24,150 versus 9,686, a 59.9% advantage. Physics scores favor the Core i7 by 60.6% (2,202 versus 868). Data encryption shows a 62.9% gap (22,917 versus 8,501), and prime number finding a 55.3% gap (152 versus 68).

Where Each One Wins

The Core i7-14650HX wins in every workload category present in the database, but the magnitude of its advantage depends heavily on whether the task scales with core count. The Core i7 features 16 cores and 24 threads, while the Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. This disparity explains why multi-threaded workloads show the largest deltas, often exceeding 70%.

For heavily parallel tasks such as video rendering, data compression, scientific simulation, and integer-heavy calculations, the Core i7 is substantially faster. The Cinebench multi-core results, which simulate 3D rendering workloads, show the Core i7 delivering roughly 3 to 4 times the throughput of the Core 3. Similarly, the PassMark multithread score of 33,495 versus 11,625 confirms that the Core i7 handles concurrent thread execution far more effectively.

For single-threaded applications like legacy software, some office tasks, and lightly threaded games, the Core i7 still leads, but by a much narrower margin. The 5.9% to 10.4% advantage in single-core tests suggests that both processors have competitive per-core performance, with the Core i7's higher boost clock and larger cache providing the edge. The Core 3 304's single-core score of 3,614 in PassMark is respectable, placing it within reach of the Core i7's 3,841.

The Core 3 304 does not win any recorded benchmark, so there is no workload category in the data where it outperforms the Core i7. Its only comparative strength is efficiency: the Core 3 has a 15 W TDP against 55 W for the Core i7, and it uses a 3 nm process node versus 10 nm. This suggests the Core 3 is designed for low-power, thermally constrained systems where absolute performance is secondary to battery life and cooling requirements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families and manufacturing nodes. The Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node, while the Core i7-14650HX uses Raptor Lake-HX and is manufactured on a 10 nm node. Both are produced by Intel, but the process difference is significant: the 3 nm node is considerably more advanced, which explains the Core 3's lower power consumption despite its smaller core count.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading support. The Core i7-14650HX has 16 cores and 24 threads, indicating a mix of performance and efficiency cores with hyper-threading on the performance cores. This configuration gives the Core i7 a 3.2x core advantage and a 4.8x thread advantage.

Cache hierarchies are also different. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core i7-14650HX provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The per-core L2 design of the Core i7 is notable, as it allows each core to access a larger private cache, which benefits workloads with high cache locality. The Core i7's 30 MB L3 is five times larger than the Core 3's 6 MB.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Core i7. The dual-channel configuration gives the Core i7 a substantial memory bandwidth advantage in practice, though the database does not quantify it. The Core i7 also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 does not.

PCIe capabilities favor the Core i7. It provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core 3 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes. This makes the Core i7 more suitable for high-bandwidth peripherals such as discrete GPUs and NVMe storage.

Integrated graphics differ in branding. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Core i7-14650HX uses UHD Graphics 710. The Core 3's graphics are newer and likely more efficient, but the database does not include graphics benchmark scores.

The Core i7-14650HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 3 304 does not. This allows overclocking on the Core i7, provided the host system supports it. Socket types differ as well: the Core 3 uses Intel BGA 1516, and the Core i7 uses Intel BGA 1964, meaning they are not interchangeable in the same motherboard.

Clock speeds favor the Core i7. Its base clock is 2.20 GHz and boost clock is 5.20 GHz, against 1.50 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost for the Core 3. The production status for both is Active, and both target the mobile market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-14650HX is significantly faster in every multi-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 20,454 versus 5,263 for the Core 3 304, a 74.3% advantage. PassMark multithread shows 33,495 versus 11,625, a 65.3% gap.

Q: How close are the single-core scores?

A: The Core i7-14650HX leads in all single-core tests, but the margins are much smaller. PassMark single-thread shows a 5.9% difference (3,841 versus 3,614), and Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 10.4% gap (1,969 versus 1,765).

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The Core i7-14650HX has 16 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Do they support the same memory types?

A: The Core 3 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus. The Core i7 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and also supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor uses a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The Core 3 304 is built on a 3 nm node, while the Core i7-14650HX uses a 10 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: Is the Core i7-14650HX overclockable?

A: Yes, the Core i7-14650HX has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 304 does not have an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy. The Core i7-14650HX outperforms the Core 3 304 in every recorded benchmark, with the largest advantages in multi-threaded workloads and the smallest advantages in single-threaded tasks. Users who need maximum throughput for rendering, compilation, data processing, or other parallel workloads should choose the Core i7-14650HX. Its 16 cores, 24 threads, 30 MB L3 cache, and 5.20 GHz boost clock deliver far higher scores across the board.

The Core 3 304 is not competitive on raw performance, but it serves a different purpose. Its 3 nm process node and 15 W TDP indicate a design focused on energy efficiency for thin-and-light laptops or fanless systems. For users who prioritize battery life and low heat output over computational speed, the Core 3 304 is the more appropriate choice. Its single-core performance is within 5.9% to 10.4% of the Core i7, which means everyday tasks like web browsing and document editing will feel similar, while prolonged multi-threaded workloads will show a large gap.

The Core i7-14650HX also offers ECC memory support, dual-channel memory, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and an unlocked multiplier, making it a more versatile platform for professional workstations and enthusiast laptops. The Core 3 304 has newer integrated graphics (Xe3 versus UHD 710) and a smaller socket footprint, but the database includes no graphics benchmarks to quantify this difference.

The average benchmark score for the Core i7-14650HX is 41,576, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 304 averages 13,745, placing it in the 68th percentile. The Core i7's nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H, scores 41,621, a 0.1% difference, confirming the Core i7 sits in a competitive performance tier. The Core 3's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, scores 13,786, a 0.3% difference, indicating the Core 3 is positioned at a much lower performance level despite its efficient design.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 304 | Intel Core i7-14650HX |

|----------------|-----------------|----------------------|

| Cores | 5 | 16 |

| Threads | 5 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 1964 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Raptor Lake-HX |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes | Gen 5, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) | UHD Graphics 710 |

| Unlocked Multiplier | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SAE3K | SRMXH |