Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core 3 N355 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits decisively in favor of the Intel Core 3 305, which wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The single exception is PassMark integer math, where the Intel Core 3 N355 scores 33894 against 32295, a 4.7% advantage. That one result does not offset the scale of the Core 3 305's dominance elsewhere.

The Core 3 305 is the clear winner for single-threaded workloads. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3977 beats the N355's 2153 by 84.7%. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 78.2% gap, with 1852 versus 1039. The Core 3 305 also leads in Cinebench R20 single-core by 52.7% (777 versus 509) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 10.7% (186 versus 168). Any workload that depends on per-core responsiveness, such as application launches, web page rendering, or lightly threaded productivity tasks, favors the Core 3 305.

Multi-threaded performance also belongs to the Core 3 305, despite the N355 having 8 cores and 8 threads versus 6 and 6. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result is the largest gap in the entire comparison: 13123 versus 5262, a 149.4% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 5511 versus 3612, a 52.6% lead, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 1322 versus 822, a 60.8% lead. PassMark multithread scores 15439 versus 10174, a 51.7% gap. The extra cores on the N355 do not compensate for the per-core performance deficit.

Specialized workloads reinforce the same pattern. In PassMark floating point math, the Core 3 305 scores 42284 versus 22695, an 86.3% lead. PassMark physics shows 1233 versus 625, a 97.3% gap. Extended instruction throughput favors the Core 3 305 by 126.9%, with 13543 versus 5968. Prime number finding, a heavily integer-dependent test, shows the biggest relative gap: 115 versus 27, a 325.9% difference. Data encryption favors the Core 3 305 by 35.7% (11019 versus 8121), and data compression by 25.1% (146857 versus 117435). Random string sorting shows a 19.8% lead (17623 versus 14706).

The N355's only win, integer math, is narrow in percentage terms but notable because the N355 also has a higher base clock of 1.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and a shared 2 MB L2 cache configuration that might aid certain integer loops. However, the magnitude of that single win is small relative to the losses elsewhere. Across the full benchmark suite, the Core 3 305 delivers a 35.6% higher average benchmark score (18302 versus 13492), and it sits at the 72nd percentile versus the N355's 68th.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different process nodes and design families. The Core 3 305 uses a 3 nm process built by Intel, while the Core 3 N355 uses a 10 nm process, also built by Intel. The Core 3 305 carries the codename Wildcat Lake and belongs to the Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Core 3 N355 carries the codename Twin Lake and belongs to the Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) generation, with its architecture listed as Twin Lake.

Core counts differ: the Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 3 305 has no hyper-threading, and neither does the N355, so thread counts equal core counts for both. The Core 3 305 compensates with a much higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz versus 3.90 GHz on the N355. Base clocks favor the N355 at 1.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Core 3 305 has a 192 KB L1 cache, a 2.5 MB L2 cache, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The N355 has 96 KB L1 per core, a 2 MB shared L2 cache, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Core 3 305's L2 is larger and not described as shared, which may contribute to its strong single-thread results. Both parts share the same 6 MB L3 capacity.

Memory support diverges. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 with a single-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 3 305's memory bandwidth is 55% higher, which helps data-heavy workloads. Neither part supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 3 305 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core 3 N355 offers PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). The Core 3 305 has a newer PCIe generation but fewer lanes, while the N355 has more lanes at an older generation.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 3 305 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The Core 3 N355 uses UHD Graphics 770. Both target the mobile market segment and are actively in production. The Core 3 305 uses socket Intel BGA 1516, while the N355 uses Intel BGA 1264. The Core 3 305 has a part number of SAE3L, the N355 SRPNT. The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309; the N355 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Core 3 305 comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 13123 against 5262, a 149.4% advantage. That result indicates the Core 3 305's per-core efficiency overwhelms the N355's two extra cores. The R20 multi-core gap of 52.6% and R15 multi-core gap of 60.8% are smaller but still decisive.

Single-core Cinebench results show consistent superiority. R23 single-core gives 1852 versus 1039, a 78.2% lead. R20 single-core gives 777 versus 509, a 52.7% lead. R15 single-core gives 186 versus 168, a 10.7% lead. The R15 gap narrows, but the direction is unchanged.

PassMark tests reveal where the Core 3 305 distinguishes itself most. Floating point math shows 42284 versus 22695, an 86.3% gap. Physics shows 1233 versus 625, a 97.3% gap. Extended instructions show 13543 versus 5968, a 126.9% gap. Prime number finding shows 115 versus 27, a 325.9% gap, the largest relative difference in the entire dataset. Single-thread performance shows 3977 versus 2153, an 84.7% gap, which is nearly identical to the singlethread test result.

The N355's only win is PassMark integer math, scoring 33894 versus 32295, a 4.7% advantage. This is the narrowest margin in the comparison. The N355 also comes closer in data compression and random string sorting, where the Core 3 305 leads by 25.1% and 19.8% respectively, but those are still comfortable margins. Data encryption favors the Core 3 305 by 35.7%, and multithread favors it by 51.7%.

The overall benchmark average reinforces the head-to-head results. The Core 3 305 averages 18302, placing it near the Intel Core i3-14100 (18318, 0.1% lower), the Intel Core 5 330 (18345, 0.2% lower), the Intel Core 7 360 (18374, 0.4% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E (18230, 0.4% higher). The N355 averages 13492, placing it near the Intel Core i3-12100F (13494, essentially tied at 0% delta), the Intel Core i5-9500 (13452, 0.3% lower), the Intel Core 5 120UL (13594, 0.8% higher), and the Intel Core i7-1250U (13351, 1.1% higher). The Core 3 305's average sits 35.6% above the N355's average.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: Does the Core 3 305 win in multi-threaded benchmarks despite having fewer cores?

A: Yes. The Core 3 305 leads Cinebench R23 multi-core by 149.4% (13123 versus 5262), Cinebench R20 multi-core by 52.6% (5511 versus 3612), Cinebench R15 multi-core by 60.8% (1322 versus 822), and PassMark multithread by 51.7% (15439 versus 10174).

Q: What is the only benchmark where the Core 3 N355 wins?

A: PassMark integer math, where the N355 scores 33894 versus 32295, a 4.7% advantage.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 3 305 boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Core 3 N355 boosts to 3.90 GHz. The N355 has a higher base clock at 1.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare to rival processors?

A: The Core 3 305 averages 18302, comparable to the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 18230. The Core 3 N355 averages 13492, essentially tied with the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification category except TDP, which is 15 watts for both, and the shared 6 MB L3 cache.

The Core 3 305 uses a 3 nm process; the N355 uses 10 nm. The Core 3 305 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename and generation; the N355 uses Twin Lake and the Alder Lake-N generation. Core counts are 6 versus 8. Thread counts are 6 versus 8. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 1.90 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 3.90 GHz.

Socket types differ: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 3 305, Intel BGA 1264 for the N355. L1 cache is 192 KB versus 96 KB per core. L2 cache is 2.5 MB versus 2 MB shared. Memory support is DDR5 and LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 3 with 9 lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) versus UHD Graphics 770.

The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309. The N355 has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates differ: the Core 3 305 was released in April 2026, while the N355 was released in January 2025. Part numbers are SAE3L for the Core 3 305 and SRPNT for the N355. Both parts have locked multipliers, no ECC support, and target the mobile market segment.

The Verdict

The data points clearly to the Intel Core 3 305 as the stronger processor for nearly every workload category. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests, delivers a 35.6% higher average benchmark score, and sits at a higher performance percentile (72 versus 68). The Core 3 305's advantages are largest in multi-core rendering, floating point math, and extended instruction throughput, where leads range from 51.7% to 149.4%. Its single-thread advantage is also substantial, with an 84.7% lead in PassMark single-thread and a 78.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core.

The Core 3 N355 is not without merit. Its 8 cores and higher base clock give it a narrow win in PassMark integer math, and its support for DDR4 memory broadens platform compatibility. The N355 also offers more PCIe lanes (9 versus 6), though at Gen 3 rather than Gen 4. For workloads dominated by integer arithmetic, the N355 holds a small edge. But that edge is isolated.

For users choosing between these two mobile processors, the benchmark evidence favors the Core 3 305 across rendering, encryption, compression, physics, and single-threaded responsiveness. The N355's two additional cores do not translate into multi-threaded wins; the Core 3 305 beats it by 149.4% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Core 3 305 also provides higher memory bandwidth (59.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s) and a newer PCIe generation, which supports faster peripherals.

The Core 3 N355's role is narrower. It suits integer-heavy tasks and platforms that require DDR4 support or more PCIe lanes. The Core 3 305 suits everything else. The recorded data gives the Core 3 305 the verdict without qualification: 16 wins, one loss, and a dominant average score gap. The N355's single win is real but small, and it does not change the overall conclusion that the Core 3 305 is the higher-performing part.