Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core i9-14900 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the Intel Core i9-14900 wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 304. The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the i9-14900 scores 175010 versus 24640, a delta of -85.9% from the Core 3 304's perspective. That is the single biggest gap in the dataset. The second-largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with the i9-14900 at 31070 against 5263, a -83.1% delta. These two results set the pattern: heavily parallel workloads amplify the difference between the two processors.

Multi-core Cinebench results all show the i9-14900 ahead by roughly three-quarters or more. Cinebench R15 multi-core: 4793 versus 849, a -82.3% delta. Cinebench R20 multi-core: 15910 versus 4160, a -73.9% delta. The i9-14900 also dominates PassMark multi-thread at 44578 versus 11625, a -73.9% delta. PassMark data compression shows 550271 versus 114775, a -79.1% delta, and PassMark random string sorting shows 61060 versus 13659, a -77.6% delta. These are not marginal advantages; they represent a different performance class entirely.

Single-threaded gaps are smaller but still favor the i9-14900 consistently. Cinebench R23 single-core: 2212 versus 1765, a -20.2% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core: 2245 versus 587, a -73.9% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core: 315 versus 264, a -16.2% delta. PassMark single-thread: 4323 versus 3614, a -16.4% delta. The R20 single-core delta stands out as anomalous compared to the other single-core tests, but the overall direction remains unchanged.

In specialized PassMark workloads, the i9-14900 leads by margins ranging from -63.8% to -77.6%. PassMark find prime numbers: 188 versus 68, a -63.8% delta. PassMark physics: 2486 versus 868, a -65.1% delta. PassMark extended instructions: 30624 versus 9686, a -68.4% delta. PassMark data encryption: 33540 versus 8501, a -74.7% delta. PassMark floating point math: 120262 versus 29722, a -75.3% delta. Every recorded test confirms the same hierarchy.

The average benchmark score reinforces this. The Core 3 304 averages 13745 points, while the i9-14900 averages 58115 points. The Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database; the i9-14900 sits at the 92nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 3 304 include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13786 (-0.3% delta), the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868 (-0.9% delta), and the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594 (1.1% delta). The i9-14900's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M at 58323 (-0.4% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D at 58386 (-0.5% delta). These comparisons place the two processors in entirely different performance brackets.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families and process nodes. The Core 3 304 uses Wildcat Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, while the i9-14900 uses Raptor Lake architecture (Raptor Lake-R codename) on a 10 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the process difference is substantial: 3 nm versus 10 nm. The Core 3 304 belongs to the Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) generation, and the i9-14900 belongs to the Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The i9-14900 has 24 cores and 32 threads. The i9-14900 also carries a larger die at 257 mm², while the Core 3 304 has no recorded die size. Cache configurations reflect the architectural split. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14900 reports 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 values are not directly comparable in aggregate, but the L3 difference is clear: 6 MB versus 36 MB.

Clock speeds also differ. The Core 3 304 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The i9-14900 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. Thermal design power is recorded at 15 W for the Core 3 304 and 65 W for the i9-14900. The socket types are entirely different: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 3 304, and Intel Socket 1700 for the i9-14900. The market segments also differ: the Core 3 304 is a mobile part, and the i9-14900 is a desktop part.

Memory support diverges. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i9-14900 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and no recorded bandwidth figure. ECC memory support is present on the i9-14900 but absent on the Core 3 304. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes, while the i9-14900 offers Gen 5 with 16 CPU-only lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe), while the i9-14900 uses UHD Graphics 770. The multiplier is locked on both processors. Release dates show the i9-14900 launched in January 2024, and the Core 3 304 has a release date of April 2026. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 304 is $309, and for the i9-14900 it is $549.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i9-14900 scores 2212 versus 1765 for the Core 3 304, a -20.2% delta. In PassMark single-thread, the gap is -16.4% (4323 versus 3614).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 304 does not.

Q: What process nodes do the two processors use?

A: The Core 3 304 uses a 3 nm process node. The i9-14900 uses a 10 nm process node.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity for each?

A: The Core 3 304 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14900 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i9-14900 boosts to 5.80 GHz. The Core 3 304 boosts to 4.30 GHz.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The i9-14900 supports DDR4 and DDR5.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core i9-14900 is the superior performer in every recorded test. The i9-14900 wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with multi-core deltas ranging from -63.8% to -85.9% relative to the Core 3 304. The average benchmark score of 58115 for the i9-14900 versus 13745 for the Core 3 304 places them in different performance tiers, with the i9-14900 at the 92nd percentile and the Core 3 304 at the 68th percentile.

The Core 3 304 is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, 5 cores, and no multithreading. The i9-14900 is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP, 24 cores, and 32 threads. The i9-14900 also offers more L3 cache (36 MB versus 6 MB), a higher boost clock (5.80 GHz versus 4.30 GHz), dual-channel memory support, ECC memory, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. The Core 3 304 counters with a smaller process node (3 nm versus 10 nm), a lower TDP, and support for LPDDR5X memory.

The data does not support choosing the Core 3 304 on performance grounds. Its only recorded advantages are qualitative: a smaller process node, lower power envelope, and mobile form factor. For any workload measured in the database, the i9-14900 delivers higher scores, often by a factor of three to seven times in multi-threaded tests. The verdict from the measurements is unambiguous: the i9-14900 is the stronger processor across every benchmark category recorded.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 304 | Intel Core i9-14900 |

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

| Cores | 5 | 24 |

| Threads | 5 | 32 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.80 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Die size | Not recorded | 257 mm² |

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

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

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 36 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 (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

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

| Launch MSRP | $309 | $549 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | No |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900 wins every recorded benchmark category. There is no test in the database where the Core 3 304 produces a higher score. The i9-14900's largest advantages appear in multi-threaded and math-intensive workloads. PassMark integer math shows the i9-14900 at 175010 versus 24640, and Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 31070 versus 5263. These results indicate the i9-14900 is suited for workloads that scale across many cores and threads, such as rendering, compilation, and data processing.

The Core 3 304 does not win any benchmark, but its profile suggests different operational characteristics. With a 15 W TDP, 3 nm process node, and mobile market segment, it is designed for low-power environments. Its single-core scores are closer to the i9-14900 than its multi-core scores: the single-core deltas range from -16.2% to -20.2% in most tests, while multi-core deltas range from -63.8% to -85.9%. This means the Core 3 304 retains a relatively stronger single-thread position, though still behind.

For use cases requiring maximum throughput, the i9-14900 is the clear choice from the data. Its 24 cores, 32 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 5.80 GHz boost clock support the recorded multi-core dominance. For use cases prioritizing low power consumption and a compact mobile platform, the Core 3 304 offers a 15 W TDP and a smaller process node, but no performance wins in the database. The i9-14900 also provides ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, which are absent on the Core 3 304. The specification differences and benchmark results together place the i9-14900 in a higher performance class, with the Core 3 304 occupying a lower-power niche.