Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155HL Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits clearly between these two processors. The Intel Core 3 304 has a complete set of recorded measurements across Cinebench and PassMark suites, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155HL has no benchmark entries in the database. This means the Core 3 304 wins every recorded comparison by default, but the analysis requires understanding what the missing data represents.

The Core 3 304 delivers a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5263 and a single-core score of 1765. Its PassMark single-thread score sits at 3614, with a multithread score of 11625. The Ultra 7 155HL has zero recorded benchmark scores, placing it at the 50th percentile among all CPUs compared to the Core 3 304's 68th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core 3 304 is 13745, while the Ultra 7 155HL shows an average score of 0.

The Core 3 304 demonstrates specific strengths in integer math with a PassMark score of 24640, floating point math at 29722, and extended instructions at 9686. Data compression reaches 114775, encryption hits 8501, and prime number finding scores 68. Physics processing records 868, random string sorting achieves 13659, and the multithread workload completes at 11625. The Cinebench R15 multicore result of 849 and single-core result of 264 show the processor's balanced profile across generations of the Cinebench test.

Because the Ultra 7 155HL lacks any benchmark data, the database cannot assign it wins in any category. The recorded data only supports the Core 3 304's performance profile. This asymmetry defines the comparison: one processor has verified measurements, the other has none.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families. The Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation. It employs a 3 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Ultra 7 155HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS codename, and belongs to the Ultra 7 series from Core Ultra Series 1. Its process node is 7 nm, also from Intel.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning each core handles one thread. The Ultra 7 155HL has 16 cores and 22 threads, indicating a hybrid design where some cores support additional threads. The Core 3 304 runs at a base clock of 1.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Ultra 7 155HL starts lower at 1.40 GHz but boosts higher to 4.80 GHz.

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 Ultra 7 155HL lists L1 cache as 112 KB per core, L2 as 2 MB per core, and L3 as 24 MB shared. The per-core L2 sizing suggests a different cache topology across the 16 cores.

Memory support differs in width and speed. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus, achieving 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 155HL supports DDR5 memory, with capacity depending on the motherboard, over a dual-channel bus, achieving 89.6 GB/s. The Ultra 7 155HL provides roughly 50% more memory bandwidth according to the recorded figures.

PCI Express connectivity shows the Ultra 7 155HL with Gen 4 and 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Core 3 304 has Gen 4 and 6 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: the Core 3 304 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Ultra 7 155HL includes Arc Xe-LPG with 128 execution units.

Power envelopes separate the two clearly. The Core 3 304 has a thermal design power of 15 watts. The Ultra 7 155HL has a TDP of 45 watts, three times higher. This aligns with their market segments: the Core 3 304 targets mobile devices, while the Ultra 7 155HL targets desktop systems.

Sockets are incompatible. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, a ball-grid array for soldered mobile installations. The Ultra 7 155HL uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Release timing differs by roughly two years. The Ultra 7 155HL launched on 2024-04-07. The Core 3 304 launched on 2026-04-15. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 304 is $309, and for the Ultra 7 155HL it is $438.

The Verdict

The database contains complete performance measurements for the Core 3 304 and none for the Ultra 7 155HL. This single fact drives the verdict. The Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 13745. The Ultra 7 155HL sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0.

For workloads requiring measured performance, the Core 3 304 is the only option with data. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5263 places it in a specific performance band, while its single-core score of 1765 shows its strength in lightly threaded tasks. The PassMark suite confirms this with a single-thread score of 3614 and a multithread score of 11625.

The Ultra 7 155HL offers architectural advantages on paper: more cores, more threads, higher boost clock, larger L3 cache, dual-channel memory, and higher memory bandwidth. However, without recorded benchmarks, the database cannot confirm any performance advantage. The 16 cores and 22 threads suggest potential for parallel workloads, and the 24 MB shared L3 cache indicates capacity for data-heavy applications. The 4.80 GHz boost clock could benefit single-threaded tasks.

The Core 3 304 uses a more advanced 3 nm process versus the 7 nm process of the Ultra 7 155HL, which likely contributes to its lower 15-watt TDP. The Core 3 304 consumes one-third the power of the Ultra 7 155HL's 45-watt TDP, making it suitable for mobile platforms. The Ultra 7 155HL's desktop orientation with Socket 1851 and dual-channel memory suggests a different use case.

Users requiring verified performance data from the database should choose the Core 3 304. Its benchmark scores are recorded and reproducible across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and the PassMark suite. Users considering the Ultra 7 155HL must rely on its architectural specifications alone, as no measured results exist in the database.

The nearest rivals to the Core 3 304 provide context. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX scores 13786, a negligible 0.3% difference. The Intel Core i7-8750H scores 13868, 0.9% higher. The Intel Core 5 120UL scores 13594, 1.1% lower. The AMD EPYC 7443 scores 13936, 1.4% higher. These small deltas place the Core 3 304 in a tightly competitive band around the 13700 average score mark.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 155HL have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the Ultra 7 155HL. Its average benchmark score is 0 and its percentile among all CPUs is 50.

Q: What is the performance percentile of the Intel Core 3 304?

A: The Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13745.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The Ultra 7 155HL has 16 cores and 22 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Core 3 304 boosts to 4.30 GHz. The Ultra 7 155HL boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports dual-channel memory?

A: The Ultra 7 155HL supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 3 304 uses single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What process nodes do these processors use?

A: The Core 3 304 uses a 3 nm process node. The Ultra 7 155HL uses a 7 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the two processors. The winsA and winsB fields both show 0. This means the comparison relies entirely on the Core 3 304's standalone benchmark suite versus the Ultra 7 155HL's empty benchmark list.

The Core 3 304's Cinebench results show progression across test versions. R15 multicore scores 849, R20 multicore scores 4160, and R23 multicore scores 5263. Single-core results follow a similar pattern: R15 at 264, R20 at 587, and R23 at 1765. These numbers indicate scaling with newer test workloads that emphasize different instruction patterns.

PassMark results for the Core 3 304 cover multiple workload types. Data compression reaches 114775, a strong result for archive and file-handling tasks. Data encryption scores 8501, lower than compression but consistent with encryption's serial nature. Extended instructions score 9686, showing AVX and similar instruction set efficiency. Prime number finding scores 68, a low figure reflecting the single-threaded nature of that test. Floating point math scores 29722, while integer math scores 24640. The multithread score of 11625 aligns with the processor's 5 threads. Physics scores 868, and random string sorting scores 13659. Single-thread performance records 3614, with a duplicate entry confirming the same value.

The nearest rival comparisons for the Core 3 304 show tight clustering. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has an average score of 13786, which is 0.3% higher than the Core 3 304's 13745. The Intel Core i7-8750H averages 13868, 0.9% higher. The Intel Core 5 120UL averages 13594, 1.1% lower. The AMD EPYC 7443 averages 13936, 1.4% higher. This means the Core 3 304 performs within 1.4% of four very different processors, from workstation-class Threadripper to older mobile Core i7 parts.

Because the Ultra 7 155HL has no benchmarks, its architectural specifications cannot be validated against measured results. The 16 cores and 22 threads would theoretically scale well in multithreaded tests, but the database provides no evidence. The 4.80 GHz boost clock suggests competitive single-thread performance, but again, no data confirms this.

The Core 3 304's 5-thread configuration limits its multithread ceiling compared to the Ultra 7 155HL's 22 threads. However, the Core 3 304's 3 nm process and lower TDP indicate better power efficiency per operation, based on the recorded power figures and process data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. Core count: 5 versus 16. Thread count: 5 versus 22. Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 1.40 GHz. Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. TDP: 15 watts versus 45 watts. Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1851. Process node: 3 nm versus 7 nm. L1 cache: 192 KB versus 112 KB per core. L2 cache: 2.5 MB versus 2 MB per core. L3 cache: 6 MB shared versus 24 MB shared. Memory bus: single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. PCIe lanes: 6 versus 8, both Gen 4. Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core versus Arc Xe-LPG with 128 execution units. Market segment: mobile versus desktop. Release date: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-04-07. Launch MSRP: $309 versus $438. Part number: SAE3K versus SRN2Z.

Memory support shows a subtle difference. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Ultra 7 155HL supports DDR5 with capacity depending on the motherboard. The Ultra 7 155HL's memory section notes motherboard dependence, indicating a modular platform. The Core 3 304's LPDDR5X support suggests integrated memory configurations typical of mobile designs.

Both processors lack an unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking is not officially supported. Both have ECC memory set to false. Both are marked as active production status. The Core 3 304's codename is Wildcat Lake, while the Ultra 7 155HL's codename is Meteor Lake-PS. The generation field lists "Core 3 (Wildcat Lake)" for the former and "Ultra 7 (Meteor Lake-PS)" for the latter.

The series field for the Core 3 304 is null, while the Ultra 7 155HL belongs to Core Ultra Series 1. This reflects Intel's naming structure, where the Ultra 7 carries a series designation and the Core 3 does not. The architecture field confirms this: the Ultra 7 155HL explicitly uses Meteor Lake architecture, while the Core 3 304 has no architecture field filled, only the codename.

Transistor counts and die sizes are absent for both processors. The database does not record these figures. The total L3 cache field is also null for both, with only the shared L3 values provided.

The Core 3 304's single-channel memory bus limits its bandwidth to 59.7 GB/s, which is 33% lower than the Ultra 7 155HL's 89.6 GB/s. This difference matters for memory-intensive workloads, though the Core 3 304's mobile target may prioritize power savings over bandwidth.

The PCIe lane difference of 6 versus 8 affects expansion capability. Both use Gen 4, but the Ultra 7 155HL offers two additional CPU-attached lanes. For desktop use with discrete GPUs or NVMe storage, the extra lanes provide more headroom.

The integrated graphics comparison shows a generational shift. The Core 3 304 uses Xe3 Graphics with a single Xe core, while the Ultra 7 155HL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 128 execution units. The Arc branding indicates a more capable graphics solution on paper, though the database records no graphics benchmarks for either.

The release dates place the Ultra 7 155HL earlier by about two years. The Core 3 304 launched on 2026-04-15, while the Ultra 7 155HL launched on 2024-04-07. This timing correlates with their process nodes: the later chip uses 3 nm, the earlier chip uses 7 nm.

The 45-watt TDP of the Ultra 7 155HL versus the 15-watt TDP of the Core 3 304 represents a 3x difference in power allocation. This aligns with their form factors: the Core 3 304 targets thin-and-light mobile devices, while the Ultra 7 155HL targets desktop systems with active cooling. The socket types reinforce this: BGA 1516 for soldered mobile installation, Socket 1851 for replaceable desktop processors.