Intel Core 3 304 vs Intel Processor U300L Comparison

Intel Core 3 304 and Intel Processor U300L are both 15 W mobile processors from Intel, but the recorded benchmarks and specifications place them in different positions. The Core 3 304 has a full benchmark suite, while the U300L has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The following analysis relies entirely on the recorded data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Core 3 304 and the Intel Processor U300L. The U300L has an empty benchmark array, meaning no Cinebench, PassMark, or other test scores are recorded for it. The Core 3 304, by contrast, has a complete set of 17 benchmark scores.

The Core 3 304 delivers a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5263 and a single-core score of 1765. In Cinebench R20, it scores 4160 multicore and 587 single-core. The older R15 test shows 849 multicore and 264 single-core. PassMark results include a multithread score of 11625, a single-thread score of 3614, integer math at 24640, floating point math at 29722, data compression at 114775, data encryption at 8501, extended instructions at 9686, find prime numbers at 68, physics at 868, and random string sorting at 13659.

Since the U300L has no scores, every head-to-head comparison must be stated as unavailable. The Core 3 304's average benchmark score is 13745, placing it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The U300L has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile, which reflects the absence of recorded data rather than a measured performance level.

The nearest rivals to the Core 3 304, based on average score, are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX at 13786, which is 0.3% higher, the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13868, which is 0.9% higher, the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13594, which is 1.1% lower, and the AMD EPYC 7443 at 13936, which is 1.4% higher. These delta percentages show the Core 3 304 sits within a narrow band of about 1.4% around these competitors, indicating its average score is closely grouped with a diverse set of desktop and mobile processors.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Processor U300L have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists an empty benchmark array for the U300L, with an average benchmark score of 0 and no nearest rivals. The Core 3 304 has 17 recorded scores across Cinebench and PassMark tests.

Q: How does the Core 3 304 compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The Core 3 304 averages 13745. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is 0.3% higher, the Intel Core i7-8750H is 0.9% higher, the Intel Core 5 120UL is 1.1% lower, and the AMD EPYC 7443 is 1.4% higher. The largest gap among these four is 1.4%, so the Core 3 304 performs within a tight cluster.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each processor?

A: The Core 3 304 ranks in the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The U300L ranks in the 50th percentile, but that figure accompanies a zero average score, indicating no measured performance data supports it.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The U300L has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, while the Core 3 304 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The difference is 0.10 GHz.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: Both processors have 5 cores. The Core 3 304 has 5 threads, while the U300L has 6 threads. The U300L therefore supports one additional thread.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The U300L supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, and no bandwidth figure is recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 3 304 wins in every measurable category because it is the only processor with benchmark data. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 5263 indicates strong multithreaded capability for a 5-core mobile part. The single-core score of 1765 shows solid per-thread performance, driven by a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. PassMark multithread at 11625 and single-thread at 3614 reinforce that the processor handles both parallel and single-threaded workloads competently.

The U300L cannot be said to win any benchmark category, as the database records no scores for it. However, the U300L does hold advantages in certain specification areas. It has a higher boost clock at 4.40 GHz, one more thread (6 versus 5), a larger shared L3 cache at 8 MB versus 6 MB, dual-channel memory support versus single-channel, and a wider PCIe configuration with 8 lanes versus 6 lanes. These attributes suggest potential performance in memory bandwidth and connectivity, but no benchmark evidence confirms actual gains.

In use-case terms, the Core 3 304 is the only option with verified performance data. Applications that rely on Cinebench-style rendering workloads, PassMark integer or floating point math, data compression, or encryption will have measured reference points only for the Core 3 304. The U300L's dual-channel memory and larger cache may theoretically benefit memory-intensive tasks, but the absence of scores means no data supports that claim.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The Core 3 304 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The U300L has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Core 3 304 starts at a higher base frequency, while the U300L reaches a higher peak frequency.

Thread counts differ: the Core 3 304 has 5 threads for its 5 cores, while the U300L has 6 threads for its 5 cores, indicating the U300L supports hyper-threading on one core or a different thread allocation. The socket types are different as well. The Core 3 304 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the U300L uses Intel Socket 1700.

Memory support varies. The Core 3 304 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The U300L supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no recorded bandwidth. PCIe configurations also differ: the Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the U300L provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The U300L uses UHD Graphics with 48 execution units. The cache layouts are not directly comparable. The Core 3 304 has 192 KB of L1 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache. The U300L lists 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache sizes are 6 MB shared for the Core 3 304 and 8 MB shared for the U300L.

Release dates differ. The Core 3 304 has a release date of 2026-04-15, while the U300L has a release date of 2024-04-07. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 304 is $309, and the launch MSRP for the U300L is $107. Both processors are marked as active in production and have locked multipliers.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 304 is based on the Wildcat Lake codename, with a generation listed as Core 3 (Wildcat Lake). It is built on a 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. The U300L is based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS and a generation listed as Intel Processor (Raptor Lake). It uses a 10 nm process node, also fabricated by Intel.

The process node difference is significant: 3 nm versus 10 nm suggests a newer manufacturing technology for the Core 3 304, which may contribute to its higher base clock of 1.50 GHz despite the smaller node. The U300L's older 10 nm node pairs with a lower base clock of 1.20 GHz but a higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz.

The Core 3 304's L1 cache is listed as a total of 192 KB, while the U300L lists 80 KB per core. With 5 cores, the U300L's L1 totals 400 KB if per-core figures are multiplied, though the database does not state a total. The L2 cache for the Core 3 304 is 2.5 MB total, while the U300L lists 1.25 MB per core, which would total 6.25 MB across 5 cores. The U300L has a larger L3 cache at 8 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

The integrated graphics differ architecturally. The Core 3 304 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with a single Xe core, representing a newer graphics generation. The U300L uses UHD Graphics with 48 execution units, an older design. Both support ECC memory as false, and both target the mobile market segment.

The Core 3 304's memory support for LPDDR5X is unique to that model, while the U300L adds DDR4 support. The memory bus width differs, with single-channel on the Core 3 304 and dual-channel on the U300L. The Core 3 304 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while no bandwidth is recorded for the U300L.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear asymmetry. The Intel Core 3 304 has a complete set of 17 benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 13745, and a 68th percentile ranking. The Intel Processor U300L has no benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and a 50th percentile ranking that carries no measured weight.

For anyone selecting between these two based on the database, the Core 3 304 is the only processor with verified performance numbers. Its Cinebench R23 scores of 5263 multicore and 1765 single-core, along with PassMark multithread at 11625, provide concrete reference points. The U300L cannot be compared on performance because no scores exist.

The U300L does offer specification advantages: a higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz, an additional thread (6 versus 5), a larger 8 MB L3 cache, dual-channel memory, and 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. These could matter for workloads that depend on memory bandwidth or I/O throughput, but the database provides no measurements to confirm any benefit.

The Core 3 304 also has a newer 3 nm process node versus 10 nm, a higher base clock of 1.50 GHz versus 1.20 GHz, and a newer integrated graphics generation with Intel Xe3 Graphics. Its single-channel memory and smaller L3 cache are potential limitations, but its benchmark scores demonstrate that it delivers measurable performance.

The launch MSRP for the Core 3 304 is $309, and for the U300L it is $107. The price difference is large, but the database records no performance data for the lower-priced U300L, so no performance-per-dollar analysis is possible from the facts available.

The percentile data reinforces the split. The Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile, near rivals such as the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (0.3% higher average score), Intel Core i7-8750H (0.9% higher), Intel Core 5 120UL (1.1% lower), and AMD EPYC 7443 (1.4% higher). These deltas indicate the Core 3 304 performs in the same range as those established processors. The U300L's 50th percentile has no supporting scores and no rival comparisons.

The verdict from the data is straightforward. The Core 3 304 is the processor with measurable performance, a higher percentile rank, a newer process node, and a newer graphics architecture. The U300L is a specification sheet with potential advantages in clock speed, threads, cache, memory channels, and PCIe lanes, but it lacks any benchmark evidence. A user requiring verified performance data should select the Core 3 304. A user prioritizing the U300L's specific features, such as dual-channel memory or a higher boost clock, would do so without any measured performance confirmation from the database.