Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data separates these two mobile processors into clearly distinct performance tiers. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 15.1% to 68.1%. The Core Ultra 5 235HX sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 3 305 sits at the 72nd percentile. The average benchmark score of the Core Ultra 5 235HX is 52073, compared to 18302 for the Core 3 305.

The Core 3 305 is positioned for efficiency-focused mobile systems. Its 15 W TDP and 6-core, 6-thread configuration place it in the low-power segment. The Core Ultra 5 235HX, with a 55 W TDP and 14 cores, targets performance notebooks. The data shows that the Core Ultra 5 235HX delivers roughly 2.8 times the average benchmark score of the Core 3 305. The Core 3 305's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i3-14100, which scores 18318, a delta of -0.1%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 18230, a delta of 0.4%. The Core Ultra 5 235HX sits near the AMD EPYC 8124P at 52121, the Intel Core i7-14700 at 52301, and the Intel Core i9-13900F at 51730.

For the Core 3 305, the recorded data indicates a processor designed for basic multitasking and power-conscious designs. The Core Ultra 5 235HX is the choice for demanding workloads, with multicore and single-core scores that dominate. The Core 3 305 remains viable in its segment, but the performance gap is substantial. All 17 head-to-head tests record a win for the Core Ultra 5 235HX, with no wins recorded for the Core 3 305.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX has an average benchmark score of 52073, while the Intel Core 3 305 has an average benchmark score of 18302. The Core Ultra 5 235HX also sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 3 305.

Q: How large is the multicore performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 34731, while the Core 3 305 scores 13123. The delta is -62.2%, meaning the Core Ultra 5 235HX is approximately 165% faster in this test.

Q: What is the smallest performance difference between the two processors?

A: The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread testing, where the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 4683 versus 3977 for the Core 3 305, a delta of -15.1%. This is the only test where the gap falls below 50%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the Intel Core 3 305 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX have ECC memory support listed as false in the database.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, compared to 4.30 GHz for the Intel Core 3 305.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor in the database?

A: The Core 3 305's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (-0.1%), Intel Core 5 330 at 18345 (-0.2%), Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 (-0.4%), and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 18230 (+0.4%). The Core Ultra 5 235HX's nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 8124P at 52121 (-0.1%), AMD Ryzen 9 5950X at 51947 (+0.2%), Intel Core i7-14700 at 52301 (-0.4%), and Intel Core i9-13900F at 51730 (+0.7%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation, built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 5 235HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX codename, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, and is also built on a 3 nm process node, but fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 235HX has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 3 305 has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

The cache structures differ significantly. The Core 3 305 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 235HX has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 235HX also includes a larger integrated graphics solution: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 48 execution units, versus Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core on the Core 3 305.

The Core Ultra 5 235HX carries an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 3 305 does not. The Core Ultra 5 235HX uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, and the Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516. The Core Ultra 5 235HX was released in January 2025, while the Core 3 305 has a release date of April 2026. The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 235HX.

Specification Differences

The Core Ultra 5 235HX has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The base clock of the Core 3 305 is 1.50 GHz, and the Core Ultra 5 235HX runs at 2.90 GHz. The boost clock reaches 4.30 GHz on the Core 3 305 and 5.10 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 235HX. The TDP is 15 W for the Core 3 305 and 55 W for the Core Ultra 5 235HX.

Memory support differs in width and speed. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 235HX supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 3 305 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics differ in branding and execution units, as noted. The part numbers are SAE3L for the Core 3 305 and SRVFL for the Core Ultra 5 235HX. Both processors are listed as active in production and target the mobile market segment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows consistent dominance by the Core Ultra 5 235HX. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 3500 against 1322 for the Core 3 305, a delta of -62.2%. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the scores are 494 and 186, a delta of -62.3%. Cinebench R20 multicore records 14587 versus 5511, again -62.2%, and Cinebench R20 single-core records 2059 versus 777, at -62.3%. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 34731 versus 13123, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 4903 versus 1852, both at -62.2%.

The PassMark suite reveals the widest margins. PassMark data compression scores 426417 for the Core Ultra 5 235HX versus 146857 for the Core 3 305, a delta of -65.6%. Data encryption records 32697 versus 11019, a delta of -66.3%. Extended instructions show 34808 versus 13543, a delta of -61.1%. The find prime numbers test produces 361 versus 115, the largest delta in the dataset at -68.1%. Floating point math scores 129819 versus 42284, a delta of -67.4%. Integer math scores 97177 versus 32295, a delta of -66.8%. Multithread performance records 40849 versus 15439, a delta of -62.2%. Physics scores 2550 versus 1233, the smallest multicore-adjacent delta at -51.6%. Random string sorting records 50929 versus 17623, a delta of -65.4%.

The closest contest in the entire dataset is PassMark single-thread, where the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 4683 and the Core 3 305 scores 3977, a delta of -15.1%. Both single-thread entries in the database record identical values, confirming the result. This narrower margin indicates that the Core 3 305's single-thread performance is comparatively closer to the Core Ultra 5 235HX than its multicore performance, though the Core Ultra 5 235HX still leads in every recorded test.

The widest gaps occur in compute-heavy integer and floating-point workloads, where the Core Ultra 5 235HX's additional cores and higher clocks produce deltas above 66%. The narrowest gap, outside of single-thread tests, is in the physics workload at -51.6%. Across all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the Core Ultra 5 235HX records zero losses, and the Core 3 305 records zero wins. The data confirms a processor separation of roughly two performance tiers, with the Core Ultra 5 235HX occupying the higher tier in every measurable category.