Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 dominates the Intel Core 3 304 across every recorded benchmark. The database shows 17 benchmark wins for the Core Ultra 5 245 and zero for the Core 3 304. The margin is substantial in nearly every category, with the largest gaps appearing in multi-core workloads.

Cinebench R23 multicore results illustrate the scale of the difference. The Core Ultra 5 245 scores 32924, while the Core 3 304 scores 5263, a deficit of 84 percent for the latter. That is the largest delta recorded in the head-to-head data. Cinebench R20 multicore tells a similar story: the Core Ultra 5 245 posts 13828 against 4160 for the Core 3 304, a 69.9 percent gap. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 3318 versus 849, a 74.4 percent difference.

Single-core performance is closer but still firmly in favor of the Core Ultra 5 245. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 245 scores 4648, the Core 3 304 scores 1765, a 62 percent deficit. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1952 versus 587, also a 69.9 percent gap. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 468 versus 264, a 43.6 percent deficit, the smallest Cinebench delta but still a clear win.

PassMark results reinforce the pattern. The Core Ultra 5 245 leads in floating point math with 120548 against 29722, a 75.3 percent margin. Integer math shows 91187 versus 24640, a 73 percent gap. Data compression scores 400942 versus 114775, a 71.4 percent difference. Data encryption shows 30236 versus 8501, a 71.9 percent gap. Extended instructions score 33304 versus 9686, a 70.9 percent difference. Random string sorting shows 49140 versus 13659, a 72.2 percent deficit for the Core 3 304. The find prime numbers test shows 365 versus 68, an 81.4 percent gap, the second-largest margin recorded.

PassMark multithread scores 38706 for the Core Ultra 5 245 versus 11625 for the Core 3 304, a 70 percent difference. Physics testing shows 2569 versus 868, a 66.2 percent gap. PassMark single-thread scores 4394 versus 3614, a 17.8 percent deficit, the smallest margin in the entire comparison. The single-thread result is the only test where the Core 3 304 remains within shouting distance, though it still loses.

The average benchmark score in the database summarizes the divide. The Core Ultra 5 245 averages 48995, while the Core 3 304 averages 13745. That places the Core Ultra 5 245 in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 68th percentile for the Core 3 304.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion for performance: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is categorically faster. It wins every recorded benchmark, with most margins exceeding 60 percent. The Core 3 304 is a 5-core mobile part with a 15 watt TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 245 is a 14-core desktop part with a 65 watt TDP, and the benchmark results reflect that positioning.

The Core Ultra 5 245 should be selected for any workload where raw throughput matters. Multi-core rendering, data compression, encryption, and physics calculations all show massive advantages. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, which it trails by 0.5 percent in average score, and the Intel Core i5-14600K, which it beats by 0.8 percent. That places it in strong company for desktop computing.

The Core 3 304 serves a different purpose. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 5 120UL, which it trails by 1.1 percent, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, which it trails by 0.3 percent. It sits near the 68th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms most processors in the database, but it is not competitive with the Core Ultra 5 245. For a low-power mobile part, its single-thread score of 3614 in PassMark is respectable, but the 17.8 percent single-thread gap to the Core Ultra 5 245 remains decisive.

Users who need a desktop processor for demanding multi-threaded applications should choose the Core Ultra 5 245 without hesitation. Users constrained to a mobile platform with modest power limits will find the Core 3 304 adequate for lighter workloads, but the data shows no scenario where it beats the Core Ultra 5 245.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use different core architectures and are built for different platforms. The Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, part of the Core 3 generation. The Core Ultra 5 245 uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 generation.

Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ. The Core 3 304 is manufactured by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 245 is manufactured by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 245 contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The database does not list transistor count or die size for the Core 3 304.

Cache structures diverge significantly. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245 therefore has substantially more cache at every level, particularly L3, where it offers four times the capacity.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 304 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The Core Ultra 5 245 includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The database does not provide direct graphics benchmarks, but the execution unit count suggests a much larger GPU on the Core Ultra 5 245.

Memory support differs by platform. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core Ultra 5 245 supports DDR5 only. The Core 3 304 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 245 uses a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the Core Ultra 5 245 but not on the Core 3 304.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 5 245 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. That gives the Core Ultra 5 245 both a newer PCIe generation and more than three times the lane count.

The Core Ultra 5 245 includes a part number of SRVFE and belongs to the Arrow Lake architecture. The Core 3 304 has a part number of SAE3K and belongs to the Wildcat Lake architecture. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads. Neither processor supports Hyper-Threading, so thread count equals core count for both.

Base clocks differ substantially. The Core 3 304 runs at 1.50 GHz base, while the Core Ultra 5 245 runs at 3.50 GHz base. Boost clocks show a smaller gap: 4.30 GHz for the Core 3 304 versus 5.10 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 245. The boost clock advantage of 0.80 GHz is significant, but the base clock advantage of 2.00 GHz is even larger.

Thermal design power differs by platform. The Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 watts, suitable for mobile systems. The Core Ultra 5 245 has a TDP of 65 watts, typical for desktop processors.

Sockets are incompatible. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, a ball grid array socket for soldered mobile installation. The Core Ultra 5 245 uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket. The market segments confirm this: the Core 3 304 is listed as Mobile, while the Core Ultra 5 245 is listed as Desktop.

Release dates differ. The Core Ultra 5 245 was released on 2025-01-06. The Core 3 304 was released on 2026-04-15. The launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 5 245 is $270. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 304 is $309. The database lists no other pricing information.

Memory bus width differs: single-channel for the Core 3 304, dual-channel for the Core Ultra 5 245. That feeds into the bandwidth difference of 59.7 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. ECC support is present on the Core Ultra 5 245 and absent on the Core 3 304. The Core Ultra 5 245 also has a larger listed transistor count and die size, while the Core 3 304 lacks those entries.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has an average benchmark score of 48995, while the Intel Core 3 304 has an average score of 13745. The Core Ultra 5 245 also sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 68th percentile for the Core 3 304.

Q: What is the smallest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread performance. The Core Ultra 5 245 scores 4394, while the Core 3 304 scores 3614, a 17.8 percent deficit. This is the only test where the Core 3 304 stays within 20 percent of the Core Ultra 5 245.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ. The Core 3 304 is manufactured by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 245 is manufactured by TSMC.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 304 does not list ECC support.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245 has 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth over a dual-channel bus. The Core 3 304 has 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth over a single-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245 provides Gen 5 PCIe with 20 CPU lanes. The Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 PCIe with 6 CPU lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its largest advantages are in multi-core workloads, where it leads by 70 to 84 percent. Cinebench R23 multicore shows an 84 percent gap, find prime numbers shows an 81.4 percent gap, and floating point math shows a 75.3 percent gap. These results make it the clear choice for rendering, scientific computing, data compression, and any workload that scales with core count and cache capacity.

The Core Ultra 5 245 also wins decisively in memory-bound tasks. Data compression scores 400942 versus 114775, a 71.4 percent margin, and random string sorting scores 49140 versus 13659, a 72.2 percent margin. The dual-channel memory bus and larger L3 cache contribute to these results. Its 24 MB shared L3 cache versus 6 MB for the Core 3 304 provides a substantial advantage for repeated data access patterns.

The Core 3 304 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its closest result is PassMark single-thread, where it trails by only 17.8 percent. That suggests its strongest relative position is in lightly threaded tasks, though it still loses. For mobile use with a 15 watt TDP and a single-channel memory bus, the Core 3 304 delivers usable performance, but the database shows no workload where it surpasses the Core Ultra 5 245.

The Core Ultra 5 245 also holds the advantage in platform features. It offers Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes, ECC memory support, dual-channel memory, and a larger integrated GPU with 64 execution units. The Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 PCIe with 6 lanes, no ECC, single-channel memory, and a 1 Xe integrated GPU. For desktop users who need expansion, ECC reliability, or higher memory throughput, the Core Ultra 5 245 is the only option with those capabilities.

In summary, the data places the Core Ultra 5 245 firmly above the Core 3 304 in every measured dimension. The Core 3 304 remains a capable low-power mobile processor, but its benchmark scores, cache sizes, memory bandwidth, and PCIe capabilities all trail the Core Ultra 5 245 by wide margins. Users seeking desktop performance should select the Core Ultra 5 245; users bound to a mobile platform with a 15 watt power limit will find the Core 3 304 serviceable, but the performance ceiling is far lower.