Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 268V Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data divides cleanly between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 3 304 records zero wins. That absolute sweep defines the use-case split: the Core Ultra 7 268V is the stronger part across every measured workload category, from single-threaded responsiveness to heavily parallel rendering tasks.

The Core 3 304 still holds a positional advantage in the broader database. Its 68th percentile ranking versus all CPUs places it above a substantial share of the installed processor population, and its average benchmark score of 13745 lands within 1.4% of the AMD EPYC 7443 and within 0.9% of the Intel Core i7-8750H. The Core Ultra 7 268V sits higher, at the 74th percentile, with an average score of 20897, which positions it alongside the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE (0.0% delta) and the Intel Core i5-12600T (0.1% behind). So while the Core 3 304 is a competent mid-pack mobile part, the Core Ultra 7 268V operates in a distinctly higher performance class.

For users focused on lightly threaded tasks, the gap narrows considerably. The Core Ultra 7 268V leads by 8.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core and by 10.8% in PassMark single-thread. These margins indicate that the Core 3 304 is not far behind in everyday responsiveness, despite being the older and lower-tier product. The real separation emerges in multi-threaded and math-heavy workloads, where the Core Ultra 7 268V’s additional cores and higher clocks produce leads ranging from 36.7% to 64.6%. The use-case split therefore favors the Core Ultra 7 268V for content creation, compilation, data compression, and any workload that scales across cores, while the Core 3 304 remains viable for basic productivity where single-thread performance is the primary driver.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V scores 1921 versus 1765 for the Intel Core 3 304, a lead of 8.1%.

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

A: The Core Ultra 7 268V scores 10653, while the Core 3 304 scores 5263. That is a 50.6% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 268V.

Q: What is the biggest percentage win recorded in the head-to-head data?

A: The largest delta appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 268V scores 192 versus 68 for the Core 3 304, a 64.6% lead.

Q: Do the two processors share the same process node?

A: Yes, both are built on a 3 nm process, but the Core 3 304 uses Intel as the foundry, while the Core Ultra 7 268V uses TSMC.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each part?

A: The Core 3 304 has an average benchmark score of 13745, and the Core Ultra 7 268V has an average benchmark score of 20897.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals a consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 268V scores 1616 against 849 for the Core 3 304, a 47.5% lead. The single-core gap in that same test is much smaller: 293 versus 264, a 9.9% difference. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 6887 versus 4160, a 39.6% margin, and the single-core scores are 972 versus 587, also a 39.6% margin. The R23 results show the widest multi-core gap at 50.6% (10653 versus 5263), while single-core narrows to 8.1% (1921 versus 1765).

The PassMark suite amplifies the multi-core trend. In integer math, the Core Ultra 7 268V scores 42669 versus 24640, a 42.3% lead. Floating point math shows 57628 versus 29722, a 48.4% gap. The extended instructions test yields 15323 versus 9686, a 36.8% difference. Data compression favors the Core Ultra 7 268V at 181443 versus 114775, a 36.7% margin, while data encryption shows 13779 versus 8501, a 38.3% lead. The physics test, which often reflects multi-core scaling, gives 1617 versus 868, a 46.3% gap.

The most dramatic divergence appears in prime number finding: 192 versus 68, a 64.6% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 268V. Random string sorting shows 22416 versus 13659, a 39.1% lead. The multithread aggregate test records 19297 versus 11625, a 39.8% gap. Single-thread performance remains the closest comparison: 4051 versus 3614, a 10.8% difference.

These results indicate that the Core Ultra 7 268V delivers roughly 40% to 50% higher throughput in most parallel workloads, with the prime number test showing an even larger advantage. The Core 3 304’s single-thread deficit is modest, suggesting that the architectural differences matter less in lightly threaded scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two parts diverge on several core specifications. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 304 versus 2.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 268V. Boost clocks also differ: 4.30 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. Thermal design power is close, with the Core 3 304 rated at 15 watts and the Core Ultra 7 268V at 17 watts.

The sockets are incompatible: the Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 268V uses Intel BGA 2833. Memory support diverges: the Core 3 304 lists DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and a measured bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 7 268V lists memory support as dependent on the motherboard, with a dual-channel bus and no recorded bandwidth figure. PCIe capabilities differ as well: the Core 3 304 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 268V offers Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Core Ultra 7 268V uses Arc 140V. Release dates are separated by roughly 19 months: the Core Ultra 7 268V launched on 2024-09-23, and the Core 3 304 on 2026-04-15. The Core 3 304 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the Core Ultra 7 268V has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The Core 3 304 is based on Wildcat Lake, falling under the Core 3 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 268V uses Lunar Lake, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 7 generation. Both use a 3 nm process, but the foundry differs: Intel fabricates the Core 3 304, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 7 268V.

Cache organization differs 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 7 268V lists 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation on the Core Ultra 7 268V suggests a different cache hierarchy design, likely contributing to its higher single-thread scores.

The Core Ultra 7 268V’s 8 cores versus 5 cores on the Core 3 304 explains most of the multi-threaded performance gap. The higher base and boost clocks on the Core Ultra 7 268V (2.20 GHz and 5.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz and 4.30 GHz) further account for the single-thread advantage. The memory subsystem also differs: single-channel on the Core 3 304 versus dual-channel on the Core Ultra 7 268V, which can affect bandwidth-sensitive workloads despite the Core 3 304’s recorded 59.7 GB/s figure.

The PCIe generation difference (Gen 4 versus Gen 5) and the integrated graphics disparity (Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe versus Arc 140V) complete the architectural picture. The Core Ultra 7 268V’s newer Lunar Lake design, TSMC fabrication, and larger cache pool align with its benchmark superiority.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V outperforms the Intel Core 3 304 in every recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 8.1% in single-core tests to 64.6% in the prime number workload. Its average benchmark score of 20897 versus 13745 represents a 52% overall advantage. The Core Ultra 7 268V also carries a higher percentile ranking (74th versus 68th), confirming its stronger position in the broader processor landscape.

The Core 3 304 is not without merit. Its 68th percentile ranking and average score of 13745 place it in the same performance band as the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (0.3% behind) and the Intel Core 5 120UL (1.1% ahead). For users whose workloads are primarily single-threaded, the 8.1% to 10.8% deficit against the Core Ultra 7 268V may be acceptable, especially given the Core 3 304’s lower launch MSRP of $309.

However, the Core Ultra 7 268V’s wins are not marginal. The 50.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 48.4% lead in floating point math, and the 46.3% lead in physics indicate that any multi-threaded workload will see substantial gains. The dual-channel memory bus, larger shared L3 cache (12 MB versus 6 MB), and higher clocks provide structural advantages that the benchmark results confirm.

The choice depends on workload priority. For users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness and willing to accept a 10% deficit, the Core 3 304 remains a functional mobile processor. For any workload that scales across cores, or where the highest possible single-thread score matters, the Core Ultra 7 268V is the only rational pick based on the recorded data. The 17-0 sweep in head-to-head benchmarks leaves no ambiguity about which part delivers more performance.