Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core i9-14901E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records a sweeping victory for the Intel Core i9-14901E across all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core 3 305 failing to claim a single win. The most decisive margin appears in PassMark integer math, where the i9-14901E scores 112,736 against the Core 3 305's 32,295, a delta of 71.4% in favor of the desktop part. That gap reflects a massive difference in raw computational throughput, far larger than the margins seen in other workloads.

Multi-threaded rendering tests show consistently large leads for the i9-14901E. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i9-14901E records 25,753 points versus 13,123 for the Core 3 305, a 49% advantage. Cinebench R20 multicore follows the same pattern: 10,816 against 5,511, again a 49% delta. The R15 multicore test yields 2,595 versus 1,322, a 49.1% gap. Every Cinebench iteration confirms the same story: the i9-14901E delivers roughly twice the multi-threaded score of the Core 3 305.

Single-core performance tells a similar but slightly narrower story. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the i9-14901E at 3,635 points versus 1,852 for the Core 3 305, a 49.1% delta. The R20 single-core test records 1,526 versus 777, a 49.1% gap, while R15 single-core shows 366 versus 186, a 49.2% difference. PassMark single-thread results compress the gap considerably: 4,354 versus 3,977, a delta of only 8.7%. This indicates that while the i9-14901E holds a clear lead in single-threaded work, the Core 3 305 is far more competitive in that specific metric than in any other recorded test.

PassMark's broader workload suite reinforces the i9-14901E's dominance. Data compression shows 288,777 versus 146,857, a 49.1% delta. Floating point math records 81,089 versus 42,284, a 47.9% gap. The physics test shows 3,041 versus 1,233, a 59.5% delta. Random string sorting yields 39,138 versus 17,623, a 55% margin. Data encryption shows 18,571 versus 11,019, a 40.7% gap. Extended instructions produce the smallest multi-threaded delta at 21.5%, with scores of 17,249 versus 13,543. Prime number finding records 189 versus 115, a 39.2% difference.

The overall average benchmark scores place these processors in different tiers. The i9-14901E averages 37,911 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Core 3 305 averages 18,302. The i9-14901E sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, whereas the Core 3 305 ranks at the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the i9-14901E include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (delta 0%), the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X (delta -0.1%), and the Intel Core 5 211E (delta 0.2%). The Core 3 305's closest competitors are the Intel Core i3-14100 (delta -0.1%), the Intel Core 5 330 (delta -0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E (delta 0.4%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core 3 305 wins zero.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark integer math, where the i9-14901E leads by 71.4%. The Core 3 305 scores 32,295 while the i9-14901E scores 112,736.

Q: How close is single-threaded performance?

A: PassMark single-thread shows the smallest gap at 8.7%, with the i9-14901E scoring 4,354 versus 3,977 for the Core 3 305. Cinebench single-core tests show much larger gaps, around 49%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i9-14901E has an average benchmark score of 37,911, while the Core 3 305 averages 18,302. The i9-14901E sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, the Core 3 305 at the 72nd.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: The i9-14901E's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 with a 0% delta. The Core 3 305's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-14100 with a -0.1% delta, essentially a tie.

Q: Does the Core 3 305 have any advantage in the recorded data?

A: No. The data shows the Core 3 305 trailing in every benchmark, with no wins and no positive deltas. Its only relative strength is the narrower single-thread gap.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node, while the Intel Core i9-14901E uses the Raptor Lake-R codename and a 10 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process generation gap is significant: the Core 3 305 uses a much newer fabrication technology.

The Core 3 305 is a mobile part with 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The i9-14901E is a desktop part with 8 cores and 16 threads, indicating simultaneous multi-threading support. This thread count difference directly explains much of the multi-threaded benchmark gap.

Cache architecture also differs sharply. The Core 3 305 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i9-14901E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The i9-14901E's L3 cache is six times larger in aggregate, which benefits workloads with large working sets.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-14901E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The i9-14901E also supports ECC memory, which the Core 3 305 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core 3 305 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU, while the i9-14901E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The i9-14901E's newer PCIe generation and higher lane count make it more suitable for discrete GPUs and high-bandwidth storage.

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 3 305 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with one Xe core, while the i9-14901E uses UHD Graphics 770. The die size for the i9-14901E is recorded at 257 mm²; no die size is recorded for the Core 3 305.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 305 and 2.80 GHz for the i9-14901E. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz and 5.60 GHz respectively.

Thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 3 305 is rated at 15 W, while the i9-14901E is rated at 65 W. The sockets are incompatible: the Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the i9-14901E uses Intel Socket 1700.

The Core 3 305 has no recorded architecture name, while the i9-14901E is listed as Raptor Lake. The Core 3 305's generation is "Core 3 (Wildcat Lake)" and the i9-14901E's is "Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh)".

The process nodes are 3 nm for the Core 3 305 and 10 nm for the i9-14901E. The i9-14901E has a recorded die size of 257 mm²; the Core 3 305 has none recorded.

Cache figures differ in format and size. The Core 3 305 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The i9-14901E has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3.

Memory support: the Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, the i9-14901E supports DDR4 and DDR5. The memory bus is single-channel for the Core 3 305 and dual-channel for the i9-14901E. The Core 3 305 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s; the i9-14901E has none recorded. ECC memory is supported only on the i9-14901E.

PCIe: the Core 3 305 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes, the i9-14901E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics: the Core 3 305 has Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe), the i9-14901E has UHD Graphics 770.

The market segments differ: mobile for the Core 3 305, desktop for the i9-14901E. Release dates are 2026-04-15 for the Core 3 305 and 2024-06-30 for the i9-14901E. The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309; the i9-14901E has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i9-14901E wins every single benchmark in the comparison, with margins ranging from 8.7% in PassMark single-thread to 71.4% in PassMark integer math. Its average benchmark score of 37,911 is more than double the Core 3 305's 18,302, and it sits 14 percentile points higher among all CPUs.

The Core 3 305's strongest showing is in single-threaded PassMark tests, where it trails by only 8.7%. In every other workload, the i9-14901E leads by at least 21.5%, with the majority of multi-threaded tests showing roughly a 49% gap. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration of the i9-14901E, combined with its larger 36 MB L3 cache and higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz, explains its consistent advantage.

For workloads that depend on multi-threaded throughput, integer math, physics simulation, or data compression, the i9-14901E is the clear choice based on the benchmark record. Its dual-channel memory bus, Gen 5 PCIe with 16 lanes, and ECC support also make it more suitable for memory-intensive or error-sensitive desktop workloads.

The Core 3 305, with its 15 W TDP, 3 nm process, and single-channel memory, occupies a different niche. Its mobile socket and low power envelope align with compact or portable systems. Its single-thread PassMark score of 3,977 is respectable and close to the i9-14901E's 4,354, meaning lightly threaded tasks on the Core 3 305 would not suffer as large a penalty as heavily threaded workloads.

Buyers who prioritize multi-core rendering, heavy computation, or high-throughput desktop work should select the i9-14901E. The data shows no scenario where the Core 3 305 outperforms it. Users constrained by power limits, mobile form factors, or newer process technology may consider the Core 3 305, but the benchmark results offer no performance justification for choosing it over the i9-14901E.