Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265T Comparison

The Intel Core 3 304 and Intel Core Ultra 7 265T represent two distinct tiers within Intel's current mobile and desktop lineups. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, with the Core Ultra 7 265T dominating the Core 3 304 across every recorded benchmark. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, architectural differences, and specific workloads where each processor holds an advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark suite reveals a decisive advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T, which wins all 17 recorded comparisons. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core Ultra 7 265T scores 31,558 versus 5,263 for the Core 3 304, a delta of -83.3% for the latter. This massive gap reflects the substantial difference in core count and memory bandwidth between the two parts.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though with a narrower margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 7 265T scores 4,455 against 1,765 for the Core 3 304, a -60.4% delta. The PassMark single-thread test shows the smallest gap of the entire suite: the Core Ultra 7 265T posts 4,338 versus 3,614 for the Core 3 304, a -16.7% delta. This indicates that while the Core Ultra 7 265T has a significant clock speed advantage, the Core 3 304's single-core efficiency is relatively competitive.

Multi-threaded workloads amplify the Core Ultra 7 265T's lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 265T scores 13,254 against 4,160 for the Core 3 304, a -68.6% delta. PassMark multi-thread shows 37,084 versus 11,625, a -68.7% delta. The Core Ultra 7 265T's 20 cores and threads provide roughly a 4x advantage in raw throughput over the Core 3 304's 5 cores and threads.

Specific PassMark subtests reinforce the pattern. Floating point math shows the Core Ultra 7 265T at 129,817 versus 29,722 for the Core 3 304, a -77.1% delta. Integer math follows with 104,943 versus 24,640, a -76.5% delta. Data compression shows 370,158 versus 114,775, a -69% delta, while data encryption shows 29,687 versus 8,501, a -71.4% delta.

The Core Ultra 7 265T also leads in specialized workloads. Extended instructions score 28,609 versus 9,686, a -66.1% delta. Find prime numbers scores 322 versus 68, a -78.9% delta. Random string sorting scores 44,400 versus 13,659, a -69.2% delta. Physics simulation scores 2,391 versus 868, a -63.7% delta.

The average benchmark score confirms the overall positioning: the Core Ultra 7 265T averages 47,697, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 304 averages 13,745, placing it in the 68th percentile. The Core Ultra 7 265T's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 with a 0.4% delta, while the Core 3 304's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX with a -0.3% delta.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 304 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Both have the same base clock of 1.50 GHz.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265T scores 31,558 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is -83.3% higher than the Core 3 304's score of 5,263. This is the largest performance gap in the entire benchmark suite.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265T features 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 3 304 features 5 cores and 5 threads. Neither processor supports Hyper-Threading, as each has equal core and thread counts.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265T has an average benchmark score of 47,697, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 304 has an average benchmark score of 13,745, placing it in the 68th percentile.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for each processor?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265T has a TDP of 35 watts, while the Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 watts. The Core 3 304's lower TDP indicates a more power-efficient design for mobile applications.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265T was released on 2025-01-06, while the Core 3 304 was released on 2026-04-15. The Core 3 304 is the newer part by over a year.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and foundries. The Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process node. The Core Ultra 7 265T uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename and is manufactured on TSMC's 3 nm process node. Both use the same process node size, but the foundry differs: Intel for the Core 3 304, TSMC for the Core Ultra 7 265T.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. 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 7 265T has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 265T's per-core L2 design scales with its 20 cores, providing significantly more total cache capacity.

Memory support also differs. The Core 3 304 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 265T supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel memory bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities vary by generation and lane count. The Core 3 304 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes. The Core Ultra 7 265T supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes. The Core Ultra 7 265T's newer PCIe generation and higher lane count provide more expansion headroom for discrete components.

Integrated graphics differ in architecture and execution units. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe unit. The Core Ultra 7 265T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU. The Core Ultra 7 265T's integrated GPU offers significantly more execution resources.

Transistor count and die size are only recorded for the Core Ultra 7 265T, which has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 3 304 has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database. The Core Ultra 7 265T's larger die reflects its higher core count, larger cache, and more powerful integrated GPU.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265T has 20 cores and 20 threads. Boost clocks differ: 4.30 GHz for the Core 3 304 versus 5.30 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 265T. Base clocks are identical at 1.50 GHz.

TDP differs significantly: 15 watts for the Core 3 304 versus 35 watts for the Core Ultra 7 265T. This reflects the Core 3 304's mobile market segment versus the Core Ultra 7 265T's desktop segment. Sockets differ as well: the Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 265T uses Intel Socket 1851.

Memory bandwidth shows a 42.7 GB/s gap: 59.7 GB/s for the Core 3 304 versus 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 265T. The memory bus width differs, with the Core 3 304 using single-channel and the Core Ultra 7 265T using dual-channel. Memory type support also differs, with the Core 3 304 supporting LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 265T supports only DDR5.

PCIe specifications differ: the Core 3 304 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 265T uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 3 304 featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) and the Core Ultra 7 265T featuring Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Release dates differ by over a year, and the launch MSRP values are $309 for the Core 3 304 and $384 for the Core Ultra 7 265T.

Cache specifications show the Core Ultra 7 265T with larger L2 and L3 caches. The Core 3 304 has 2.5 MB L2 and 6 MB shared L3, while the Core Ultra 7 265T has 3 MB per core L2 and 30 MB shared L3. L1 cache is listed as 192 KB for the Core 3 304 and 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 7 265T.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T wins every recorded benchmark, so the analysis focuses on the magnitude of its advantages across different workload types. The largest wins appear in multi-threaded and compute-heavy tasks. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows an -83.3% delta, the biggest gap in the suite. PassMark find prime numbers shows -78.9%, floating point math shows -77.1%, and integer math shows -76.5%. These results indicate the Core Ultra 7 265T excels in rendering, scientific computation, and general number-crunching workloads.

The Core Ultra 7 265T also dominates in memory-intensive applications. Data compression shows -69%, data encryption shows -71.4%, and random string sorting shows -69.2%. The dual-channel memory bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide a clear advantage for workloads that move large amounts of data. The Core 3 304's single-channel bus at 59.7 GB/s restricts its throughput in these scenarios.

The Core 3 304's relative strengths appear in single-threaded efficiency and power consumption. Its 15 watt TDP is less than half the Core Ultra 7 265T's 35 watt TDP, making it suitable for power-constrained mobile devices. In the PassMark single-thread test, the Core 3 304's -16.7% delta is the smallest gap recorded, suggesting its single-core performance is comparatively strong given its lower clock speed and core count.

For mobile productivity workloads, the Core 3 304 offers adequate performance with its 5 cores and 5 threads. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,765 and PassMark single-thread score of 3,614 indicate capable performance for everyday tasks. The Core 3 304's support for LPDDR5X memory and Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe unit provides a complete mobile platform solution.

For desktop workstation and content creation workloads, the Core Ultra 7 265T is the clear choice. Its 20 cores and 20 threads deliver substantial multi-threaded performance, as evidenced by Cinebench R20 multi-core at 13,254 and PassMark multi-thread at 37,084. The Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU provides significantly more integrated graphics capability than the Core 3 304's Xe3 implementation.

The 90th percentile ranking for the Core Ultra 7 265T versus the 68th percentile for the Core 3 304 places them in different performance tiers entirely. The Core Ultra 7 265T's nearest rivals are high-end desktop parts like the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D and Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, while the Core 3 304's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-8750H and AMD EPYC 7443. The data positions the Core Ultra 7 265T as a high-performance desktop processor and the Core 3 304 as a mid-range mobile processor with efficiency-focused characteristics.