Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H, which wins 16 of 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The sole win for the Intel Core 3 304 comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 264 against 251, a 5.2% advantage. That result is notable because it indicates the Core 3 304 can edge out the higher-tier part in a specific legacy single-threaded workload, even though its boost clock is lower at 4.30 GHz versus 5.10 GHz.

Every other direct comparison favors the Core Ultra 7 255H, often by substantial margins. In multi-threaded Cinebench tests, the gap is consistent and large. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 255H scores 1515 against 849, a 44% deficit for the Core 3 304. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the scores are 6381 versus 4160, a 34.8% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 9240 versus 5263, a 43% difference. These results track closely with the core count difference: 16 cores and 16 threads for the Ultra 7 255H, versus 5 cores and 5 threads for the Core 3 304.

Single-core performance in the newer Cinebench versions also favors the Ultra 7 255H, though the margins are smaller. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Ultra 7 255H scores 900 versus 587, a 34.8% gap. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1843 versus 1765, a 4.2% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test shows 4317 versus 3614, a 16.3% lead for the Ultra 7 255H.

The PassMark suite reveals the largest proportional differences across the board. Data compression scores are 298850 versus 114775, a 61.6% gap. Data encryption shows 23395 versus 8501, a 63.7% deficit. Extended instructions score 23755 versus 9686, a 59.2% gap. Find prime numbers is the most lopsided test: 303 versus 68, a 77.6% difference. Floating point math runs 98796 versus 29722, a 69.9% gap. Integer math shows 77975 versus 24640, a 68.4% deficit. Multithread scoring is 30703 versus 11625, a 62.1% gap. Physics tests show 2254 versus 868, a 61.5% gap. Random string sorting scores 36058 versus 13659, a 62.1% gap.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 255H is 33537, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 304 averages 13745, in the 68th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 7 255H include the AMD Ryzen 5 240 with a delta of 0%, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at -0.4%, and the Intel Core i5-12600HX at 0.5%. The Core 3 304 sits near the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at -0.3%, the Intel Core i7-8750H at -0.9%, and the Intel Core 5 120UL at 1.1%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R15 single-core?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 wins that specific test with a score of 264, beating the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H's 251 by 5.2%. This is the only head-to-head benchmark where the Core 3 304 comes out ahead.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H scores 9240 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core 3 304 scores 5263. That is a 43% advantage for the Ultra 7 255H, reflecting its 16 cores versus 5 cores.

Q: What is the difference in PassMark single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H scores 4317 in the PassMark single-thread test, compared to 3614 for the Intel Core 3 304. This represents a 16.3% lead for the Ultra 7 255H.

Q: How do the two processors compare in data encryption workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H scores 23395 in PassMark data encryption, while the Intel Core 3 304 scores 8501. The Ultra 7 255H leads by 63.7%, one of the largest gaps in the entire benchmark set.

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has an average benchmark score of 33537, while the Intel Core 3 304 has an average of 13745. The Ultra 7 255H also sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 68th percentile for the Core 3 304.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Core 3 304 is competitive with the Ultra 7 255H?

A: Outside of the Cinebench R15 single-core win, the closest result is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ultra 7 255H leads by only 4.2% (1843 versus 1765). The Cinebench R15 single-core test is the only outright victory for the Core 3 304.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-H, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: the Core 3 304 is manufactured by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is manufactured by TSMC.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, which means it lacks simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads, also without SMT, but with more than three times the physical cores. This core disparity is the primary driver of the multi-threaded benchmark results.

Cache hierarchies are also structured differently. The Core 3 304 has an L1 cache of 192 KB, an L2 of 2.5 MB, and an L3 of 6 MB shared. The Core Ultra 7 255H lists L1 cache as 192 KB per core and L2 as 3 MB per core, with an L3 of 24 MB shared. The L3 capacity is four times larger on the Ultra 7 255H, which contributes to its advantage in data-heavy workloads like compression and encryption.

Memory support is a major differentiator. Both processors support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, but the Core 3 304 uses a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 255H uses a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. That 42.7 GB/s difference is substantial and likely affects memory-bound workloads. ECC memory is supported on the Ultra 7 255H but not on the Core 3 304.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 255H provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe generation and greater lane count give the Ultra 7 255H more headroom for high-speed storage and discrete GPUs. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Ultra 7 255H uses Arc Graphics 140T.

The sockets are not interchangeable. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses Intel BGA 2049. This means the two processors are not drop-in compatible with each other at the platform level.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has a higher base clock at 2.00 GHz, versus 1.50 GHz for the Intel Core 3 304. The boost clock also favors the Ultra 7 255H at 5.10 GHz, versus 4.30 GHz for the Core 3 304. Thermal design power is rated at 28 watts for the Ultra 7 255H and 15 watts for the Core 3 304, a 13-watt difference that reflects the higher core count and clock speeds.

Memory bandwidth is a clear differentiator: 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7 255H versus 59.7 GB/s for the Core 3 304. The memory bus is dual-channel on the Ultra 7 255H and single-channel on the Core 3 304. ECC memory support exists only on the Ultra 7 255H.

The L3 cache is 24 MB shared on the Ultra 7 255H, versus 6 MB shared on the Core 3 304. L2 cache is listed as 3 MB per core on the Ultra 7 255H, versus 2.5 MB total on the Core 3 304. L1 cache is 192 KB per core on the Ultra 7 255H, versus 192 KB total on the Core 3 304.

PCIe specifications differ: Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the Ultra 7 255H, Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the Core 3 304. The integrated graphics are named differently: Arc Graphics 140T for the Ultra 7 255H, Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) for the Core 3 304.

The release dates are distinct. The Core Ultra 7 255H was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core 3 304 is dated 2026-04-15. The Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309; the Core Ultra 7 255H has no listed launch MSRP in the database. The part numbers differ: SAE3K for the Core 3 304, SRQAN for the Core Ultra 7 255H.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and holds a 144% higher average benchmark score (33537 versus 13745). Its advantages in core count, cache size, memory bandwidth, and clock speed translate into dominant multi-threaded results, with gaps exceeding 60% in several PassMark workloads.

The Intel Core 3 304 is not without merit. Its single-core Cinebench R15 result is the only head-to-head win, and its 15-watt TDP suggests it targets lower-power mobile designs. The 68th percentile placement versus the 83rd for the Ultra 7 255H reflects that positioning. For workloads that rely on a single legacy benchmark, the Core 3 304 can match or slightly exceed the Ultra 7 255H, but for nearly every other measured task, the Ultra 7 255H is meaningfully faster.

The architecture split reinforces this. The Ultra 7 255H benefits from a 16-core Arrow Lake design, dual-channel memory at 102.4 GB/s, and Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes. The Core 3 304 uses a 5-core Wildcat Lake design, single-channel memory at 59.7 GB/s, and Gen 4 PCIe with 6 lanes. These are not close specifications, and the benchmark data reflects that distance.

The verdict from the measurements is straightforward. For users who need multi-threaded throughput, broad memory bandwidth, or headroom for PCIe Gen 5 devices, the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is the stronger choice. For users constrained to a 15-watt power envelope or a platform built around the Intel BGA 1516 socket, the Intel Core 3 304 is the only one of the two that fits, and it offers a single-core performance edge in one specific test. The data does not show any scenario where the Core 3 304 is competitive in sustained multi-threaded or memory-intensive workloads.