Intel Core 3 304 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 304 compare to the Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100 in core count?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100 has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Qualcomm part offers more than three times the core count.

Q: What are the clock speed differences between these two mobile processors?

A: The Intel Core 3 304 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Snapdragon X2E-96-100 has a base clock of 4.45 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Qualcomm chip runs at higher clocks in both states.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Snapdragon X2E-96-100 delivers 228.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth through a triple-channel LPDDR5X interface. The Intel Core 3 304 provides 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X bus. The Qualcomm part offers roughly four times the bandwidth.

Q: What manufacturing process do these chips use?

A: Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process. Intel produces the Core 3 304 at its own foundry, while TSMC manufactures the Snapdragon X2E-96-100. The Intel die size is not recorded, while the Qualcomm die measures 220 mm².

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 304 have benchmark results in the database?

A: Yes, the Intel part has extensive benchmark data across Cinebench R15, R20, R23 and PassMark tests. The Snapdragon X2E-96-100 currently has no benchmark scores recorded, leaving its measured performance unknown.

Q: What is the market positioning of each chip according to the database?

A: Both target the mobile segment and are in active production. The Intel Core 3 304 sits at the 68th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 13745, while the Snapdragon X2E-96-100 sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0 due to missing measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their fundamental design approaches. The Intel Core 3 304, codenamed Wildcat Lake, is a compact 5-core, 5-thread part with no hyperthreading. It belongs to the Core 3 generation and uses Intel's own 3 nm process. Its cache hierarchy consists of 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The chip integrates Intel Xe3 Graphics with a single Xe core.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100, codenamed Glymur, represents a very different philosophy. It packs 18 cores and 18 threads, also without SMT, but the core count alone tells only part of the story. The cache configuration is substantially larger: 288 KB of L1 per core, 16 MB of L2 per module, and 9 MB of shared L3. The die size is recorded at 220 mm², fabricated by TSMC on the same 3 nm node.

Memory architecture separates these two even further. The Intel chip uses a single-channel memory bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X, yielding 59.7 GB/s. The Snapdragon uses triple-channel LPDDR5X exclusively, achieving 228.6 GB/s. This bandwidth gap suggests different target workloads, with the Qualcomm part likely designed for memory-intensive operations.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Intel Core 3 304 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Snapdragon X2E-96-100 offers Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. The newer PCIe standard and doubled lane count on the Qualcomm part indicate greater expansion capability.

The integrated graphics differ as well. Intel pairs its Xe3 Graphics with the Core 3 304, while Qualcomm uses the Adreno X2-90. Neither GPU has dedicated benchmark data in the database, so direct graphical comparisons cannot be made from recorded measurements.

Both chips are socketed differently: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 3 304 and Qualcomm BGA 2343 for the Snapdragon. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $309, while the Snapdragon has no recorded launch price.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Core 3 304 and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100. The head-to-head array is empty, and neither wins nor losses are recorded for either side.

What the database does provide is a full benchmark profile for the Intel chip alone. Cinebench R15 results show 849 points in multicore and 264 in singlecore. R20 scores are 4160 multicore and 587 singlecore. R23 yields 5263 multicore and 1765 singlecore.

PassMark tests paint a broader picture of the Intel part's capabilities. Data compression scores 114775, while encryption reaches 8501. Extended instructions produce 9686, and prime number finding scores just 68. Floating point math hits 29722, integer math 24640, and multithread performance 11625. Physics scores 868, random string sorting 13659, and single-thread performance 3614.

The Snapdragon X2E-96-100 has no recorded scores in any of these tests. Its average benchmark score sits at 0, and its nearest rivals list is empty. This absence of data prevents any numerical comparison between the two processors.

The Intel chip's nearest rivals provide context for its performance class. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX averages 13786, a 0.3% advantage over the Core 3 304. The Intel Core i7-8750H scores 13868, 0.9% higher. The Intel Core 5 120UL trails by 1.1% at 13594, while the AMD EPYC 7443 leads by 1.4% at 13936. These margins are all narrow, placing the Core 3 304 in a tightly contested performance band.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 304 | Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 5 | 18 |

| Threads | 5 | 18 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 4.45 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | Not recorded |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Qualcomm BGA 2343 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Glymur |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die size | Not recorded | 220 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB total | 288 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB total | 16 MB per module |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 9 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X only |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Triple-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 228.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 12 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 (1 Xe) | Adreno X2-90 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | Not recorded |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-04-05 |

| Part number | SAE3K | X2E96100 |

The table shows every field where the two chips differ. Notably, the Snapdragon has no TDP recorded in the database, and the Intel part has no die size measurement. Both support ECC memory? No, both have ECC memory set to false. Both are mobile parts with active production status and locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

Without head-to-head benchmark data, wins must be inferred from the recorded specifications and the Intel chip's measured performance.

The Intel Core 3 304 wins in situations where its 15 W TDP and smaller core count enable efficient operation. Its 5-core design with a 4.30 GHz boost clock delivers single-thread scores of 264 in Cinebench R15, 587 in R20, and 1765 in R23. PassMark single-thread performance reaches 3614. These figures, combined with the 68th percentile ranking, suggest the Intel part handles lightly threaded workloads competently.

The Snapdragon X2E-96-100 wins on paper in every raw specification category. Its 18 cores provide substantially more parallel processing capacity. The 5.00 GHz boost clock exceeds the Intel chip's 4.30 GHz ceiling. The 228.6 GB/s memory bandwidth dwarfs the 59.7 GB/s available to the Core 3 304. The triple-channel memory bus and Gen 5 PCIe with 12 lanes indicate a platform designed for data-heavy tasks.

The Intel chip's nearest rivals show its competitive position. It sits within 1.4% of the AMD EPYC 7443 and 0.9% of the Intel Core i7-8750H in average benchmark score. This proximity suggests the Core 3 304 performs in a familiar range for x86 mobile processors, with the 68th percentile ranking confirming solid mainstream positioning.

The Snapdragon's 50th percentile ranking, despite having no benchmark scores, places it at the median of all CPUs in the database. This ranking likely reflects its specification sheet rather than measured performance, as the average score of 0 cannot support a percentile calculation on its own.

The Verdict

The data presents an unusual situation. One processor has a complete benchmark profile, while the other has none. Any verdict must acknowledge this asymmetry.

For users requiring measured performance data, the Intel Core 3 304 is the only option with recorded results. Its benchmark scores span Cinebench and PassMark suites, providing concrete numbers for single-thread and multithread workloads. The 68th percentile ranking and average score of 13745, closely matched against rivals like the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Intel Core i7-8750H, indicate a capable mobile processor.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-96-100 offers specifications that appear superior on paper: 18 cores, higher clocks, more memory bandwidth, and newer PCIe. But the database records no benchmark results for this chip. Its 50th percentile ranking and zero average score mean its actual performance cannot be verified from available data.

The Intel Core 3 304 also carries a launch MSRP of $309, providing a reference point for its market positioning. The Snapdragon has no recorded price.

The verdict depends entirely on what the data can support. The Intel chip wins on evidence: it has measurable benchmark results, a defined TDP, and a clear performance class relative to known rivals. The Snapdragon wins on specification sheet ambition: more cores, faster clocks, wider memory, and newer connectivity.

The database cannot confirm whether the Snapdragon's specifications translate into real-world performance. Until benchmark results are recorded for the X2E-96-100, the Intel Core 3 304 stands as the only processor in this comparison with verified performance data. Users who prioritize measured results over stated specifications would select the Intel part based on available evidence. Those who trust the Snapdragon's specification sheet would wait for benchmark confirmation.