Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores and 18 threads, while the Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 5 125HL also uses a dual-channel memory bus compared to the single-channel bus of the Core 3 305.

Q: How do the single-threaded performances compare between the two?

A: The Core 3 305 scores 1,852 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 3,977 in Passmark single-thread. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has no benchmark data recorded in the database, so a direct comparison cannot be made from the available measurements.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Core 3 305 is built on a 3 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses a 7 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 5 125HL boosts to 4.50 GHz, which is higher than the Core 3 305's 4.30 GHz boost clock. However, the Core 3 305 has a higher base clock at 1.50 GHz versus 1.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

Q: What is the thermal design power for each chip?

A: The Core 3 305 has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has a TDP of 45 watts. The Core Ultra 5 125HL is also classified as a desktop part, whereas the Core 3 305 is a mobile processor.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory. The Core Ultra 5 125HL supports DDR5, but the exact memory types depend on the motherboard. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has a higher memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s for the Core 3 305.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Intel Core 3 305 is based on the Wildcat Lake codename, which is part of the Core 3 generation. It uses a 3 nm process node and integrates a single Xe core under the Intel Xe3 Graphics branding. The chip is designed for the mobile segment and fits the Intel BGA 1516 socket. Its core configuration is straightforward: 6 physical cores and 6 threads, meaning there is no hyperthreading support. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL, in contrast, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 and uses the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS codename. It is built on a 7 nm process and is a desktop processor on the Intel Socket 1851. The core layout is more complex: 14 cores and 18 threads, implying a hybrid arrangement of performance and efficiency cores, though the exact breakdown is not specified in the data. The cache structure differs notably, with 112 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, plus 18 MB of shared L3. The integrated graphics are labeled as Arc Xe-LPG with 112 execution units, which is a more substantial GPU block than the single Xe core in the Core 3 305.

Memory architecture also separates the two. The Core 3 305 uses a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 125HL uses a dual-channel bus, doubling theoretical bandwidth to 89.6 GB/s. Both support DDR5, but the Core 3 305 additionally supports LPDDR5X. Neither processor supports ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 for both, but the Core 3 305 has only 6 CPU lanes while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has 8.

The release timeline differs as well. The Core Ultra 5 125HL launched in 2024-04-07, while the Core 3 305 has a release date of 2026-04-15. Both processors are production active and have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

Without benchmark scores for the Core Ultra 5 125HL, the analysis relies on architectural specifications and recorded data for the Core 3 305. The Core 3 305 has a complete set of Cinebench and Passmark results, giving it a clear edge in any scenario where measured performance is required. It holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18,302. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18,318 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Core 5 330 at 18,345 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core 7 360 at 18,374 (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 18,230 (0.4% behind). The Core 3 305 is essentially at parity with these chips, within a fraction of a percent in either direction.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL, however, has no recorded benchmarks in the database. Its advantage lies in raw architectural features: 14 cores versus 6, 18 threads versus 6, more L3 cache (18 MB versus 6 MB), a higher boost clock (4.50 GHz versus 4.30 GHz), and double the memory bandwidth. For workloads that scale with core count and memory throughput, the Core Ultra 5 125HL is likely to win, but the database cannot confirm this with measured scores.

The Core 3 305 wins in efficiency-oriented scenarios. Its 15 W TDP is one-third of the Core Ultra 5 125HL's 45 W, making it suited for thin-and-light mobile systems. Its single-channel memory is simpler to implement in compact designs. The Core 3 305 also has a higher base clock, which can help in lightly threaded tasks that do not trigger boost behavior.

For desktop users who need sustained multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 5 125HL's core count and dual-channel memory provide the structural advantage. The 18 MB L3 cache is three times larger, which benefits workloads with high cache reuse. The Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 112 EUs are likely stronger than the single Xe core, though no graphics benchmarks are present.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 305 | Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL |

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

| Cores | 6 | 14 |

| Threads | 6 | 18 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 1.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Meteor Lake-PS |

| Process node | 3 nm | 7 nm |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 112 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 (depends on motherboard) |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) | Arc Xe-LPG 112EU |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-04-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | $325 |

Both processors lack unlocked multipliers and ECC memory support. The part numbers differ: SAE3L for the Core 3 305 and SRN9D for the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for this pairing. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has an empty benchmark array, and the wins counter for both processors is zero. Consequently, no direct score comparisons can be made from recorded measurements.

The Core 3 305 does have substantial standalone data. In Cinebench R23, it scores 13,123 in multi-core and 1,852 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 5,511 multi-core and 777 single-core. Cinebench R15 results are 1,322 multi-core and 186 single-core. Passmark tests show 15,439 in multithread, 3,977 in single-thread, 32,295 in integer math, 42,284 in floating point math, 14,6857 in data compression, 11,019 in data encryption, 13,543 in extended instructions, 115 in prime number finding, 1,233 in physics, and 17,623 in random string sorting.

The nearest rival comparison for the Core 3 305 places it within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E and within 0.1% to 0.4% behind the three Intel rivals. This indicates that the Core 3 305's performance profile is very tightly clustered around these chips, making any of them a near-equivalent in average throughput.

For the Core Ultra 5 125HL, the absence of scores means the percentile ranking of 50 is not derived from actual runs but likely reflects its unmeasured status in the database. Its average benchmark score is zero. This does not imply a lack of capability, only a lack of recorded evidence. The architectural data suggests it should outperform the Core 3 305 in multi-threaded scenarios, given the 14-core/18-thread configuration and higher boost clock, but the database cannot substantiate that with numbers.

A practical interpretation: if a workload relies on the Core 3 305's measured strengths, such as its Passmark integer math score of 32,295 or its Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 13,123, those figures stand as the only verified performance points. The Core Ultra 5 125HL remains an unknown quantity in this benchmark suite. Any comparison between the two must therefore treat the Core 3 305 as the only chip with empirical validation, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL is analyzed purely on paper.