Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison
Intel Core 3 305
Core Ultra 7 258V
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The head-to-head comparison between the Intel Core 3 305 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V shows a decisive overall victory for the Ultra 7 part. Of the 17 recorded benchmark comparisons, the Core Ultra 7 258V wins 16, while the Core 3 305 wins only one. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 258V sits at 20454, which places it in the 74th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 305 averages 18302, landing in the 72nd percentile.
The single most dramatic difference appears in Cinebench R15 single-core testing. The Core Ultra 7 258V scores 285 against the Core 3 305's 186, a 34.7% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. Prime number finding shows a similar pattern, with the Ultra 7 scoring 185 versus 115 for the Core 3, a 37.8% gap in favor of the Ultra 7. Floating-point math also heavily favors the Ultra 7, which scores 57372 against 42284, a 26.3% lead. Integer math follows at 42889 versus 32295, a 24.7% difference.
However, the Core 3 305 delivers its single win in a significant way. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 3 305 scores 13123, while the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 10301. That is a 27.4% advantage for the Core 3 305, and it is the only test where the Core 3 305 finishes ahead. This result stands in contrast to the other multi-core tests, where the Ultra 7 leads by 17.2% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (1596.5 vs 1322) and by 18.2% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (6739 vs 5511).
The remaining workloads show consistent but narrower margins. Data compression favors the Ultra 7 at 176686 versus 146857, a 16.9% gap. Data encryption goes to the Ultra 7 at 13534 versus 11019, an 18.6% gap. Extended instructions score 14717 for the Ultra 7 against 13543, an 8% lead. The multithread PassMark test shows 18887 for the Ultra 7 versus 15439, an 18.3% gap. Physics simulation scores 1565 against 1233, a 21.2% lead. Random string sorting shows 21580 versus 17623, an 18.3% gap.
Single-threaded performance is nearly identical in the PassMark suite, with the Ultra 7 scoring 4018 versus 3977, just a 1% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core also shows a close result: 1872 for the Ultra 7 versus 1852 for the Core 3, a 1.1% gap. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a wider spread at 951 versus 777, an 18.3% lead for the Ultra 7.
In the nearest rivals comparison, the Core 3 305 sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E, and within 0.1% of the Intel Core i3-14100. The Core Ultra 7 258V sits within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 and within 0.4% of the AMD EPYC 7713. These deltas confirm that both processors occupy distinct performance tiers in the database.
Architecture Differences
The architectural divergence between these two processors is substantial. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses the Lunar Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: Intel fabricates the Core 3 305, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 7 258V.
Core counts differ. The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading evident from the equal core and thread counts. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Both are locked processors with no unlocked multiplier available.
Cache configurations are markedly different. 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 7 258V lists 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 capacity doubles from 6 MB to 12 MB, and the per-core L2 allocation suggests a different memory hierarchy design.
Memory support also separates the two. The Core 3 305 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X. The memory bus differs as well: the Core 3 305 uses a single-channel configuration with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses dual-channel memory with 136.5 GB/s, more than double the bandwidth.
PCIe generation and lane counts differ. The Core 3 305 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses Gen 5 with 4 CPU-only lanes. The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 3 305 featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe, while the Core Ultra 7 258V features Arc 140V graphics.
Sockets are distinct: the Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses Intel BGA 2833. The release dates are separated by about 19 months, with the Core 3 305 releasing on 2026-04-15 and the Core Ultra 7 258V releasing on 2024-09-23. The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 7 258V.
Where Each One Wins
The Core Ultra 7 258V dominates across nearly every workload category in the database. It wins all Cinebench R15 tests (single and multi-core), all Cinebench R20 tests, Cinebench R23 single-core, and every PassMark test except one. The margins are largest in prime number finding (37.8%), Cinebench R15 single-core (34.7%), and floating-point math (26.3%). These results indicate a strong advantage in single-threaded responsiveness and math-heavy tasks.
The Core Ultra 7 258V also leads in memory-sensitive workloads. Data compression shows a 16.9% lead, data encryption an 18.6% lead, and random string sorting an 18.3% lead. The dual-channel memory configuration with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth likely contributes to these consistent wins. The 8-core, 8-thread configuration with per-core L2 cache also supports sustained parallel throughput in PassMark multithread (18887 vs 15439).
The Core 3 305 wins only in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 13123 against 10301, a 27.4% advantage. This is an anomaly within the broader multi-core results, as the Ultra 7 leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core and Cinebench R20 multi-core by 17.2% and 18.2%, respectively. The R23 result suggests that the Core 3 305 can deliver strong sustained multi-core performance in certain specific workloads, despite having fewer cores and threads.
The single-threaded PassMark scores are nearly tied (4018 vs 3977, a 1% gap), and Cinebench R23 single-core is similarly close (1872 vs 1852, a 1.1% gap). In these near-ties, the Core 3 305 shows that its 4.30 GHz boost clock can nearly match the Ultra 7's 4.80 GHz boost in certain single-threaded scenarios. However, the wider single-core gaps in Cinebench R15 (34.7%) and Cinebench R20 (18.3%) show that the Ultra 7 generally has the stronger single-core performance.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ on several specification fields. The Core 3 305 has 6 cores, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores. Thread counts follow the same pattern: 6 threads for the Core 3, 8 threads for the Ultra 7. Base clocks differ: 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 versus 2.20 GHz for the Ultra 7. Boost clocks also differ: 4.30 GHz for the Core 3 versus 4.80 GHz for the Ultra 7.
TDP figures are close but not identical: 15 W for the Core 3 305 and 17 W for the Core Ultra 7 258V. Sockets are different (Intel BGA 1516 vs Intel BGA 2833). The codenames differ (Wildcat Lake vs Lunar Lake), and the generations differ (Core 3 Wildcat Lake vs Ultra 7 Lunar Lake). The foundry differs (Intel vs TSMC).
Cache specifications diverge in structure. The Core 3 305 lists total L1 as 192 KB, L2 as 2.5 MB, and L3 as 6 MB (shared). The Core Ultra 7 258V lists L1 as 192 KB (per core), L2 as 2.5 MB (per core), and L3 as 12 MB (shared). Memory support differs: DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Core 3 versus LPDDR5X only for the Ultra 7. Memory bus differs: single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth differs: 59.7 GB/s versus 136.5 GB/s.
PCIe configurations differ: Gen 4 with 6 lanes for the Core 3 versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the Ultra 7. Integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) versus Arc 140V. Release dates differ: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-09-23. The launch MSRP is recorded only for the Core 3 305 at $309. Part numbers differ (SAE3L vs SRPMNSRPMT). Both have ECC memory support set to false, and both have the multiplier locked.
FAQ
Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core 3 305 wins 1 benchmark, which is Cinebench R23 multi-core.
Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two?
A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 285 against the Core 3 305's 186, a 34.7% advantage. The largest margin in the other direction is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 3 305 leads by 27.4%.
Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?
A: The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads.
Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?
A: The Core 3 305 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses a dual-channel memory bus with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth.
Q: Are both processors built on the same process node?
A: Yes, both are built on a 3 nm process node. However, the foundry differs: Intel fabricates the Core 3 305, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 7 258V.
Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?
A: The Core 3 305 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, exactly double.
The Verdict
The data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is the stronger processor in nearly all measured workloads. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score (20454 vs 18302), and occupies a higher percentile rank (74th vs 72nd). Its advantages are most pronounced in single-core Cinebench tests, prime number finding, and floating-point math, where it leads by margins from 26.3% to 37.8%.
The Intel Core 3 305 has one notable strength: Cinebench R23 multi-core performance. Its 13123 score beats the Ultra 7's 10301 by 27.4%. Beyond that single test, the Core 3 305 trails by margins of roughly 1% to 37.8% across all other benchmarks. In near-tied tests like PassMark single-thread (3977 vs 4018) and Cinebench R23 single-core (1852 vs 1872), the Core 3 305 is competitive but still behind.
For workloads focused on Cinebench R23 multi-core rendering, the Core 3 305 delivers a specific advantage. For everything else, including single-threaded tasks, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, physics, and general multithreaded PassMark performance, the Core Ultra 7 258V is the better choice. The Ultra 7 also brings double the L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB), more than double the memory bandwidth (136.5 GB/s vs 59.7 GB/s), and a newer PCIe generation (Gen 5 vs Gen 4).
Users prioritizing the single Cinebench R23 multi-core win may select the Core 3 305. Users needing consistent performance across a wide range of workloads should select the Core Ultra 7 258V based on the recorded data. The benchmark database shows the Ultra 7 as the more capable processor overall.