Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Processor 300T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 3 304 holds a decisive performance advantage over the Intel Processor 300T based on the recorded data. The Core 3 304 delivered a multi-threaded score of 11625 in PassMark, while the Processor 300T has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This absence of data for the Processor 300T means every measurable performance comparison defaults to the Core 3 304.

In Cinebench R23, the Core 3 304 produced a multi-core score of 5263 and a single-core score of 1765. The Processor 300T has no Cinebench R23 entries, leaving no direct rival figure to compare. The Core 3 304 also recorded Cinebench R20 scores of 4160 multi-core and 587 single-core, plus Cinebench R15 scores of 849 multi-core and 264 single-core.

The Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, while the Processor 300T sits at the 50th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core 3 304 is 13745, and the nearest rival data places it within 1.4% of the AMD EPYC 7443 (13936, delta -1.4%) and 0.9% of the Intel Core i7-8750H (13868, delta -0.9%). The Processor 300T has no nearest rivals recorded, reinforcing the absence of comparable measured data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different Intel design families. The Intel Core 3 304 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process node, while the Intel Processor 300T uses the Raptor Lake-S codename on a 10 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the process generation gap is substantial.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads, which indicates hyper-threading is active. Clock behavior differs as well: the Core 3 304 runs at a 1.50 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Processor 300T has a 3.40 GHz base clock with no boost clock recorded in the database.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Processor 300T lists L1 as 80 KB per core and L2 as 1.25 MB per core, with the same 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core versus total presentation makes direct L1 and L2 comparison awkward, but the shared L3 is identical at 6 MB.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Processor 300T supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel memory bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded. ECC memory is unavailable on both.

Platform requirements differ. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket, while the Processor 300T uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Processor 300T provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Processor 300T uses UHD Graphics 710. The die size for the Processor 300T is recorded at 163 mm², while the Core 3 304 has no die size entry.

The Core 3 304 is a 15 W part, while the Processor 300T is a 35 W part. The Core 3 304 launched in 2026, and the Processor 300T launched in 2024. The market segments match the sockets: the Core 3 304 is a mobile processor, and the Processor 300T is a desktop processor.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 3 304 wins every measurable performance category because the Processor 300T has no benchmark scores in the database. In PassMark sub-tests, the Core 3 304 recorded 114775 in data compression, 8501 in data encryption, 9686 in extended instructions, 68 in find prime numbers, 29722 in floating point math, 24640 in integer math, 868 in physics, 13659 in random string sorting, and 3614 in single-thread performance.

The Processor 300T wins on base clock frequency, with 3.40 GHz versus 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 304. It also wins on memory channel count with dual-channel support against single-channel, and on PCIe generation with Gen 5 against Gen 4. The Processor 300T offers more CPU PCIe lanes at 16 versus 6.

The Processor 300T also offers broader memory compatibility with both DDR4 and DDR5 support, while the Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. For desktop builders with existing DDR4 memory, the Processor 300T is the only one of the two that can use it. The Core 3 304 counters with LPDDR5X support, which suits mobile designs.

The Core 3 304 wins on process node efficiency with 3 nm against 10 nm, on core and thread count with 5 cores and 5 threads against 2 cores and 4 threads, and on boost clock with 4.30 GHz against no recorded boost. The Core 3 304 also carries a higher performance percentile at 68 against 50.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Does the Intel Processor 300T support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes, the Processor 300T supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The Core 3 304 uses a 3 nm process node, while the Processor 300T uses a 10 nm process node.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 3 304 boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Processor 300T has no boost clock recorded in the database.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, neither processor supports ECC memory.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each processor?

A: The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, and the Processor 300T uses Intel Socket 1700.

Q: Which processor has a better performance percentile?

A: The Core 3 304 is at the 68th percentile among all CPUs, while the Processor 300T is at the 50th percentile.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core 3 304 and Intel Processor 300T differ in the following recorded specifications:

• Cores: 5 versus 2
• Threads: 5 versus 4
• Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 3.40 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus none recorded
• TDP: 15 W versus 35 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Wildcat Lake versus Raptor Lake-S
• Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm
• Die size: none recorded versus 163 mm²
• L1 cache: 192 KB versus 80 KB per core
• L2 cache: 2.5 MB versus 1.25 MB per core
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared on both
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5
• Memory bus: Single-channel versus Dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s versus none recorded
• PCIe: Gen 4, 6 lanes versus Gen 5, 16 lanes
• Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) versus UHD Graphics 710
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release date: 2026 versus 2024
• Part number: SAE3K versus SRN3K

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core 3 304 as the stronger performer in every measured benchmark category. Its average benchmark score of 13745 places it in the 68th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7443 and the Intel Core i7-8750H, both within a 1.4% margin. The Processor 300T has no recorded benchmark scores, so no measured performance can be attributed to it.

The Core 3 304 also leads on core count, thread count, process node, boost clock, L3 cache capacity, memory bandwidth, and integrated graphics generation. Its 15 W TDP indicates a lower power envelope than the Processor 300T's 35 W TDP.

The Processor 300T leads on base clock, memory channel width, memory type compatibility, PCIe generation and lane count, and desktop socket availability. It also launched earlier and carries a lower launch MSRP of $82, against the Core 3 304's launch MSRP of $309.

The choice depends on the platform. For mobile designs requiring the highest measured performance per watt, the Core 3 304 is the only option with recorded data. For desktop builds requiring dual-channel DDR4 support and Gen 5 PCIe, the Processor 300T offers those features but no recorded performance scores. The recorded benchmark data supports the Core 3 304 as the performance leader, while the Processor 300T remains a desktop-oriented part with platform advantages but unverified performance in the database.