Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison
Intel Core 3 304
Core Ultra 7 258V
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
Where Each One Wins
The benchmark data delivers a completely one-sided result. Across all seventeen recorded head-to-head comparisons, the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V takes every single victory. The Intel Core 3 304 does not win a single test in the database. That outcome makes the use-case split straightforward: for any workload captured in the measurements, the Core Ultra 7 258V is the stronger processor.
The largest margins appear in multi-threaded and compute-heavy tasks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 10301 against 5263 for the Core 3 304, a 48.9% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar gap, with the Core Ultra 7 258V at 1596.5 versus 849, a 46.8% lead. PassMark floating point math gives the Core Ultra 7 258V a 57372 score compared to 29722, a 48.2% difference. These are not marginal wins; the Core Ultra 7 258V roughly doubles or nearly doubles the Core 3 304 in several demanding tests.
Single-thread performance favors the Core Ultra 7 258V but by narrower margins. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1872 versus 1765, a 5.7% gap. PassMark single-thread shows 4018 versus 3614, a 10.1% gap. Cinebench R15 single-core is the closest contest, 285 versus 264, a 7.4% difference. The Core Ultra 7 258V still wins every single-core test, but the advantage there is modest compared to the multi-core dominance.
The Core 3 304 does hold its own in one narrow sense: its average benchmark score of 13745 places it at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database. That is a respectable standing for a low-power mobile part. But the Core Ultra 7 258V sits at the 74th percentile with an average score of 20454, and its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 (20468, 0.1% above) and the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G (20425, 0.1% below). The Core 3 304, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13786, 0.3% above) and the Intel Core i7-8750H (13868, 0.9% above). The Core Ultra 7 258V operates in a higher performance class entirely.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different Intel design lineages, and the specifications confirm that. The Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses the Lunar Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ: the Core 3 304 is produced by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 258V is produced by TSMC.
Core counts separate them clearly. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads, also without hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 258V thus offers 3 additional physical cores, which explains much of its multi-core advantage. Clock speeds reinforce the gap: the Core 3 304 runs at a 1.50 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost, while the Core Ultra 7 258V runs at 2.20 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. Higher base and boost clocks on the Core Ultra 7 258V contribute to its single-core wins as well.
Cache hierarchies differ in structure and size. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 258V lists 192 KB per core for L1, 2.5 MB per core for L2, and 12 MB of shared L3. The per-core L2 allocation on the Core Ultra 7 258V, combined with double the shared L3, gives it a substantial cache advantage for data-heavy workloads.
Memory support also diverges. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X but over a dual-channel bus, delivering 136.5 GB/s. That more than double the memory bandwidth on the Core Ultra 7 258V directly aids multi-threaded throughput and memory-intensive tasks. Neither processor supports ECC memory.
PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 3 304 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 7 258V offers a newer PCIe generation, though fewer lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 3 304 carries Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Core Ultra 7 258V carries Arc 140V graphics. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so the comparison remains limited to CPU performance.
Sockets and physical configurations differ. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses Intel BGA 2833. The Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 watts, the Core Ultra 7 258V a TDP of 17 watts. The release dates are far apart: the Core 3 304 launched on April 15, 2026, while the Core Ultra 7 258V launched on September 23, 2024. The Core 3 304 carries a launch MSRP of $309, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Both are active production parts and both are multiplier-unlocked.
The Verdict
The recorded data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. The Core 3 304 wins zero of seventeen head-to-head tests. The Core Ultra 7 258V leads by large margins in multi-core workloads, moderate margins in math and encryption tasks, and smaller but consistent margins in single-core tests.
For workloads that stress multiple cores, such as rendering, compilation, or heavy data processing, the Core Ultra 7 258V delivers roughly 35% to 49% more performance depending on the specific test. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 48.9% gap, PassMark floating point math shows a 48.2% gap, and PassMark integer math shows a 42.5% gap. The Core Ultra 7 258V also wins PassMark find prime numbers by 63.2%, the largest margin in the entire comparison.
For single-threaded responsiveness, the Core Ultra 7 258V remains ahead but by a smaller amount. PassMark single-thread shows a 10.1% lead, Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 5.7% lead, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 7.4% lead. The Core 3 304 is not uncompetitive in this area, but it still trails across the board.
The Core 3 304 does offer a lower TDP of 15 watts versus 17 watts for the Core Ultra 7 258V. That 2-watt difference is minor but could matter in tightly constrained mobile designs. The Core 3 304 also supports DDR5 memory in addition to LPDDR5X, whereas the Core Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X. For systems that need socketed DDR5, the Core 3 304 has that flexibility, though at a much lower memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s versus 136.5 GB/s.
The Core 3 304 has a recorded launch MSRP of $309, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has no launch MSRP in the database. Beyond that single data point, the database does not provide pricing comparisons, and the performance gap is large enough that the choice rests on workload requirements rather than cost considerations.
For any user prioritizing raw CPU performance in the tested workloads, the Core Ultra 7 258V is the selection. For a system where the lower 15-watt TDP, DDR5 support, and later release date matter more than benchmark dominance, the Core 3 304 remains a viable mobile part, but the data shows it as the weaker performer in every recorded test.
FAQ
Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 3 304 does not win a single test.
Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?
A: The Core Ultra 7 258V leads by 48.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (10301 versus 5263), 46.8% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (1596.5 versus 849), and 38.3% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (6739 versus 4160).
Q: Is the single-core gap smaller?
A: Yes. The Core Ultra 7 258V leads by 5.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1872 versus 1765), 7.4% in Cinebench R15 single-core (285 versus 264), and 10.1% in PassMark single-thread (4018 versus 3614).
Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin?
A: PassMark find prime numbers shows the largest gap, with the Core Ultra 7 258V scoring 185 against 68 for the Core 3 304, a 63.2% difference.
Q: Do the processors use the same manufacturing process?
A: Both use a 3 nm process node, but the Core 3 304 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 258V is fabricated by TSMC.
Q: How do memory bandwidth figures compare?
A: The Core 3 304 provides 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel memory bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Core Ultra 7 258V provides 136.5 GB/s over a dual-channel bus supporting LPDDR5X only.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The seventeen recorded head-to-head tests all favor the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, but the margins vary considerably by workload type. The multi-core Cinebench tests show the largest absolute gaps. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives the Core Ultra 7 258V a 10301 score against 5263 for the Core 3 304, a 48.9% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 1596.5 versus 849, a 46.8% gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 6739 versus 4160, a 38.3% gap. These results align with the Core Ultra 7 258V having 8 cores versus 5 cores and a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus 4.30 GHz.
PassMark math tests reinforce the multi-core story. PassMark floating point math gives the Core Ultra 7 258V a 57372 score against 29722, a 48.2% lead. PassMark integer math shows 42889 versus 24640, a 42.5% lead. PassMark find prime numbers is the most lopsided result: 185 versus 68, a 63.2% gap. PassMark multithread shows 18887 versus 11625, a 38.4% gap. PassMark physics shows 1565 versus 868, a 44.5% gap.
Data and encryption workloads also favor the Core Ultra 7 258V substantially. PassMark data compression gives 176686 versus 114775, a 35% lead. PassMark data encryption gives 13534 versus 8501, a 37.2% lead. PassMark extended instructions gives 14717 versus 9686, a 34.2% lead. PassMark random string sorting gives 21580 versus 13659, a 36.7% lead.
The single-core tests are the closest contests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1872 versus 1765, a 5.7% gap. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 285 versus 264, a 7.4% gap. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 951 versus 587, a 38.3% gap, which is an outlier compared to the other single-core margins. PassMark single-thread shows 4018 versus 3614, a 10.1% gap.
The overall average benchmark score tells the same story. The Core Ultra 7 258V averages 20454, while the Core 3 304 averages 13745. That is a 48.8% higher average score for the Core Ultra 7 258V. The percentile standings reflect this: the Core Ultra 7 258V sits at the 74th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile.
A closer look at the nearest rivals in the database puts both processors in context. The Core Ultra 7 258V, with an average score of 20454, sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 (20468, 0.1% above), the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G (20425, 0.1% below), the AMD EPYC 9454P (20422, 0.2% below), and the AMD EPYC 7713 (20363, 0.4% below). The Core 3 304, with an average score of 13745, sits within 1.4% of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (13786, 0.3% above), the Intel Core i7-8750H (13868, 0.9% above), the Intel Core 5 120UL (13594, 1.1% below), and the AMD EPYC 7443 (13936, 1.4% above). The Core Ultra 7 258V competes with desktop-class and server-class processors, while the Core 3 304 aligns with older mobile and workstation parts.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across nearly every specification category in the database. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 3 304 runs at a 1.50 GHz base clock and a 4.30 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 7 258V runs at a 2.20 GHz base clock and a 4.80 GHz boost clock. TDP differs by 2 watts: 15 watts for the Core 3 304 versus 17 watts for the Core Ultra 7 258V.
Sockets are incompatible. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses Intel BGA 2833. The architectures are entirely different: the Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with the Core 3 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses the Lunar Lake architecture with the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. Both use a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: Intel for the Core 3 304, TSMC for the Core Ultra 7 258V.
Cache configurations show structural differences. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The per-core L2 on the Core Ultra 7 258V means its total L2 scales with core count, and its shared L3 is exactly double that of the Core 3 304.
Memory support differs in both type and bandwidth. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, yielding 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, yielding 136.5 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory. PCIe generations also differ: the Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 258V offers Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.
Integrated graphics are not shared. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses Arc 140V. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible from the recorded data.
Release timing and market positioning differ. The Core 3 304 was released on April 15, 2026, with a launch MSRP of $309. The Core Ultra 7 258V was released on September 23, 2024, with no launch MSRP recorded. The Core 3 304 has a part number of SAE3K, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has a part number of SRPMNSRPMT. Both are active production parts, both are mobile market segments, and both are multiplier-unlocked.