Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The Core Ultra 7 356H therefore offers more than three times the core count.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H leads in every single-thread test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 2040 versus 1765 for the Core 3 304, a 13.5% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the margin is 11.2%, with scores of 4072 and 3614.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H boosts to 4.70 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 304 reaches 4.30 GHz. The base clocks are 1.90 GHz and 1.50 GHz, respectively.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses a dual-channel memory bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 304 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s. The Ultra 7 356H provides nearly double the bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher overall benchmark average?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has an average benchmark score of 41215, compared to 13745 for the Intel Core 3 304. The Ultra 7 356H also sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 68th percentile for the Core 3 304.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H win every head-to-head benchmark?

A: Yes, the recorded data shows the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from 11.2% in single-thread tests to 79.2% in PassMark find prime numbers.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families within Intel's mobile lineup. The Intel Core 3 304 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses the Panther Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation.

Both chips are fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel's foundry. The core configurations differ substantially. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, indicating no hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads, also without hyperthreading but with more than triple the physical core count.

Cache hierarchies reflect the architectural gap. 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 356H lists 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 capacity difference is 3x in favor of the Ultra 7 356H.

Memory support is identical in type (DDR5 and LPDDR5X), but the bus implementations differ. The Core 3 304 runs single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 356H runs dual-channel memory with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, exactly double the figure.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 356H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The newer standard and doubled lane count give the Ultra 7 356H more headroom for expansion.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 304 carries Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe unit. The Core Ultra 7 356H carries Intel Xe3 Graphics without the unit count specification in the database. Both use the same graphics architecture generation.

Socket compatibility separates the two entirely. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540. These are not interchangeable platforms.

Power envelopes differ: the Core 3 304 has a TDP of 15 W, and the Core Ultra 7 356H has a TDP of 25 W. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins every recorded benchmark in the comparison set. This makes the use-case split straightforward: the Ultra 7 356H dominates in all measured workloads.

Multi-threaded applications see the largest gaps. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 18395 for the Ultra 7 356H versus 5263 for the Core 3 304, a 71.4% deficit for the smaller chip. PassMark integer math tells the same story: 83111 against 24640, a 70.4% difference. Data compression scores 336177 versus 114775, a 65.9% gap. These results indicate the Ultra 7 356H is the clear choice for rendering, encoding, compilation, and other parallel workloads.

Single-thread performance also favors the Ultra 7 356H, though by smaller margins. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2040 versus 1765, a 13.5% lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4072 versus 3614, an 11.2% lead. The Core 3 304's single-core showing is respectable, but the Ultra 7 356H still holds a consistent edge in every single-threaded test.

The Core 3 304 does have a role in power-constrained scenarios. Its 15 W TDP versus 25 W for the Ultra 7 356H means it draws less power. The Core 3 304 also uses a single-channel memory bus, which reduces complexity in compact systems. For basic productivity, light web browsing, and office tasks, the Core 3 304's single-core scores remain usable, but the data shows no workload category where it outperforms the Ultra 7 356H.

Encryption and compression workloads show the largest relative deltas in the Ultra 7 356H's favor. Data encryption scores 26345 versus 8501, a 67.7% gap. Prime number finding shows 327 versus 68, a 79.2% gap, the largest difference in the entire comparison. Floating-point math shows 103128 versus 29722, a 71.2% gap.

The Core 3 304's best relative showing comes in PassMark single-thread, where the 11.2% delta is the smallest recorded. This suggests that for lightly threaded, latency-sensitive tasks, the Core 3 304 is closer to the Ultra 7 356H, though still behind.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Core count: 5 versus 16. Thread count: 5 versus 16. Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 1.90 GHz. Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. TDP: 15 W versus 25 W. Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel BGA 2540.

Architecture: Wildcat Lake versus Panther Lake. Codename: Wildcat Lake versus Panther Lake. Generation: Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) versus Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H). Series: null versus Core Ultra Series 3.

Process node: both 3 nm, same foundry (Intel). Transistor count and die size are not recorded for either chip.

L1 cache: 192 KB total versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache: 2.5 MB total versus 2.5 MB per core. L3 cache: 6 MB shared versus 18 MB shared.

Memory bus: single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s. PCIe: Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (unit count not specified).

ECC memory: not supported on either. Multiplier unlocked: false on both. Market segment: Mobile on both. Production status: Active on both.

Release dates differ: the Core Ultra 7 356H released on 2026-01-04, and the Core 3 304 released on 2026-04-15. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 304 is $309. The Core Ultra 7 356H has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Part numbers: SAE3K for the Core 3 304, SA4RGQ9EU for the Core Ultra 7 356H.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison contains 17 benchmark entries, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins all 17. The deltas range from 11.2% to 79.2%.

Starting with Cinebench R15, the multicore test shows 3055 for the Ultra 7 356H versus 849 for the Core 3 304, a 72.2% gap. The single-core test shows 303 versus 264, a 12.9% gap.

Cinebench R20 multicore shows 12153 versus 4160, a 65.8% gap. The single-core test shows 1715 versus 587, also a 65.8% gap. Note that the single-core delta in R20 is identical in percentage to the multicore delta, which is unusual; the absolute scores differ by 1128 points in multicore and 1128 points in single-core.

Cinebench R23 multicore shows 18395 versus 5263, a 71.4% gap. The single-core test shows 2040 versus 1765, a 13.5% gap. The R23 single-core delta is the second-smallest in the entire set.

PassMark data compression shows 336177 versus 114775, a 65.9% gap. Data encryption shows 26345 versus 8501, a 67.7% gap. Extended instructions show 27898 versus 9686, a 65.3% gap.

PassMark find prime numbers shows 327 versus 68, a 79.2% gap. This is the largest delta recorded in the comparison. Floating-point math shows 103128 versus 29722, a 71.2% gap. Integer math shows 83111 versus 24640, a 70.4% gap.

PassMark multithread shows 33978 versus 11625, a 65.8% gap. Physics shows 2895 versus 868, a 70% gap. Random string sorting shows 40990 versus 13659, a 66.7% gap.

PassMark single-thread shows 4072 versus 3614, an 11.2% gap. The duplicate PassMark singlethread entry records the same scores and the same 11.2% delta.

The average benchmark scores place the two chips far apart. The Ultra 7 356H averages 41215 and sits at the 87th percentile. The Core 3 304 averages 13745 and sits at the 68th percentile. The nearest rival to the Core 3 304 is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX with an average score of 13786, a 0.3% delta. The nearest rival to the Ultra 7 356H is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with an average score of 41208, a 0% delta.

The percentile difference of 19 points (87 versus 68) reflects the substantial performance gap. The Core 3 304 sits near the 68th percentile, while the Ultra 7 356H approaches the upper tier of all CPUs. The nearest rival data confirms that the Ultra 7 356H competes with desktop-class processors like the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, which scores 41376, a 0.4% delta. The Core 3 304, by contrast, sits alongside older mobile chips like the Intel Core i7-8750H, which scores 13868, a 0.9% delta.