Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core i7-14700F Comparison

The Intel Core 3 304 and the Intel Core i7-14700F occupy very different positions in the desktop and mobile processor landscape. One is a compact, low-power chip for thin-and-light laptops, the other is a high-core-count desktop part aimed at sustained multi-threaded workloads. The benchmark data recorded in the database shows a consistent and substantial performance gap between the two, with the i7-14700F winning every single head-to-head comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head results show a decisive sweep by the Intel Core i7-14700F across all 17 benchmark comparisons. The largest difference appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i7-14700F scores 35,122 points against 5,263 for the Core 3 304, a performance deficit of 85 percent for the smaller chip. This is the widest margin in the entire dataset, reflecting the enormous difference in core count and thread count between the two processors.

Multi-threaded workloads consistently favor the i7-14700F by roughly three-quarters or more. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i7-14700F scores 14,751 versus 4,160, a gap of 71.8 percent. The PassMark integer math test shows a similar pattern: 155,808 for the i7-14700F against 24,640 for the Core 3 304, a difference of 84.2 percent. Floating point math follows suit, with 107,005 versus 29,722, or a 72.2 percent deficit. Data compression results show 505,885 versus 114,775, a 77.3 percent gap, while data encryption scores 30,144 versus 8,501, again a 71.8 percent difference.

The multi-thread PassMark test bundles many of these workloads together, and the result is 41,317 for the i7-14700F versus 11,625 for the Core 3 304, a 71.9 percent gap. Physics simulation scores 2,455 versus 868, a 64.6 percent deficit. Random string sorting shows 55,918 versus 13,659, a 75.6 percent gap. Extended instruction workloads score 28,564 versus 9,686, a 66.1 percent difference, and the prime number finding test shows 176 versus 68, a 61.4 percent gap.

Single-threaded performance is closer, but the i7-14700F still wins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7-14700F scores 4,958 versus 1,765 for the Core 3 304, a 64.4 percent gap. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2,082 versus 587, a 71.8 percent gap. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 499 versus 264, a 47.1 percent gap. The PassMark single-thread test shows 4,257 versus 3,614, a much smaller 15.1 percent gap, indicating that in lightly threaded, short-duration tasks, the Core 3 304 is relatively competitive. However, the absolute winner remains the i7-14700F.

The average benchmark score in the database tells the same story. The i7-14700F has an average score of 53,620, ranking in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 304 has an average score of 13,745, ranking in the 68th percentile. The nearest rivals for the i7-14700F include the Intel Xeon 6505P with an average score of 53,701 and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X with 53,288, placing the i7-14700F within a narrow band of high-end desktop processors. The Core 3 304 sits near the Intel Core 5 120UL, which scores 13,594, and the Intel Core i7-8750H, which scores 13,868, placing it in a mid-range mobile performance tier.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i7-14700F in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-14700F scores 35,122 points, which is 85 percent ahead of the Core 3 304’s 5,263 points. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i7-14700F scores 14,751 versus 4,160, a 71.8 percent advantage.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap as large as the multi-core gap?

A: No. In the PassMark single-thread test, the i7-14700F scores 4,257 versus 3,614 for the Core 3 304, a 15.1 percent gap. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap widens to 64.4 percent, with the i7-14700F scoring 4,958 versus 1,765. The margin varies by workload.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The i7-14700F has an average benchmark score of 53,620, while the Core 3 304 has an average of 13,745. The i7-14700F ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 304 ranks in the 68th percentile.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 3 304 does not. The i7-14700F also supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, whereas the Core 3 304 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What are the memory channel configurations?

A: The Core 3 304 uses a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i7-14700F uses a dual-channel memory bus, though the database does not record a bandwidth figure for it.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core 3 304 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The i7-14700F has no integrated graphics, as indicated by "N/A" in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. It has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading is present. The base clock is 1.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Cache is organized as 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The chip is designed for mobile use, with a TDP of 15 watts, and it uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket.

The Intel Core i7-14700F uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, built on a 10 nm process node. It has 20 cores and 28 threads, indicating a mix of performance and efficiency cores with hyper-threading on the performance cores. The base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Cache is organized as 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The die size is recorded at 257 mm². The chip is designed for desktop use, with a TDP of 65 watts, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700.

The process node difference is stark: 3 nm for the Core 3 304 versus 10 nm for the i7-14700F. This gives the smaller chip a density and power efficiency advantage, though the i7-14700F compensates with far more cores and a higher boost clock. The Core 3 304 also integrates a newer graphics unit, the Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the i7-14700F has no integrated graphics at all, which is typical for an F-series desktop part.

PCIe support differs as well. The Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The i7-14700F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, offering significantly more bandwidth for expansion cards and storage. The memory support also diverges: the Core 3 304 only supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a single-channel configuration, while the i7-14700F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. ECC memory is supported only on the i7-14700F.

The release dates are also different. The Core 3 304 was released in April 2026, while the i7-14700F was released in January 2024. Both processors are marked as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core i7-14700F is the clear choice for any workload that benefits from high thread counts. It wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with multi-core advantages often exceeding 70 percent. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-14700F is 85 percent faster. In PassMark integer math, it is 84.2 percent faster. The average benchmark score of 53,620 places it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 304’s average of 13,745 places it in the 68th percentile.

The Core 3 304’s only area of relative strength is in the PassMark single-thread test, where the gap narrows to 15.1 percent. This suggests that for short, lightly threaded tasks, the Core 3 304 can deliver reasonable performance per watt, given its 15-watt TDP versus the i7-14700F’s 65-watt TDP. However, even in this test, the i7-14700F still wins.

The i7-14700F also offers more platform features: dual-channel memory, support for DDR4 and DDR5, ECC memory, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and a larger 33 MB shared L3 cache. The Core 3 304 counters with a smaller footprint, a 3 nm process, integrated graphics, and support for LPDDR5X, but it lacks ECC and uses only single-channel memory with 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

For a buyer building a desktop system focused on multi-threaded productivity, rendering, or content creation, the i7-14700F is the superior processor according to every benchmark in the database. For a mobile system where power consumption is the primary constraint, the Core 3 304 offers a functional but much lower performance ceiling. The launch MSRP of the i7-14700F is $359, while the Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 5.40 GHz. The TDP is 15 watts for the Core 3 304 and 65 watts for the i7-14700F.

The sockets are different: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 3 304, Intel Socket 1700 for the i7-14700F. The process node is 3 nm for the Core 3 304 and 10 nm for the i7-14700F. The i7-14700F has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while the Core 3 304 has no die size recorded.

Cache configurations differ. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i7-14700F has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3.

Memory support differs: the Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the i7-14700F supports DDR4 and DDR5. The memory bus is single-channel for the Core 3 304 and dual-channel for the i7-14700F. The Core 3 304 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the i7-14700F. ECC memory is not supported on the Core 3 304 but is supported on the i7-14700F.

PCIe support differs: the Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes, while the i7-14700F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on the Core 3 304 as Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the i7-14700F has none. The market segment is mobile for the Core 3 304 and desktop for the i7-14700F. Release dates are April 2026 for the Core 3 304 and January 2024 for the i7-14700F. The launch MSRP is $309 for the Core 3 304 and $359 for the i7-14700F. Both parts have locked multipliers, and neither is listed as having a separate architecture field beyond the codename and generation already described.