Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints an unambiguous picture: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF dominates the Intel Core 3 305 across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Core 3 305 does not register a single win. The widest margins appear in multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads, where the Ultra 7's additional cores and higher clocks create substantial separation.

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ultra 7 265KF scores 49,736 against the Core 3 305's 13,123, a 73.6% advantage. The single-core gap in the same test is equally decisive: 7,021 versus 1,852, again a 73.6% delta. These percentage differences repeat consistently across Cinebench R15 and R20, both multicore and single-core, with the Ultra 7 leading by 73.6% to 73.7% in every instance. The consistency suggests the performance differential is structural rather than workload-specific.

PassMark's integer math test shows the Ultra 7 at 143,351 versus 32,295 for the Core 3, a 77.5% gap. Floating point math follows a similar pattern: 189,431 against 42,284, a 77.7% difference. Data compression results in 666,589 for the Ultra 7 versus 146,857, a 78% margin, while data encryption shows 48,198 versus 11,019, a 77.1% gap. Extended instructions deliver 54,513 versus 13,543, a 75.2% difference.

Prime number finding, a test sensitive to both clock speed and core count, shows 486 for the Ultra 7 versus 115 for the Core 3, a 76.3% margin. Random string sorting yields 79,735 versus 17,623, a 77.9% gap. The PassMark multithread score of 58,518 versus 15,439 represents a 73.6% advantage, and physics calculations show 3,633 versus 1,233, a 66.1% difference, the narrowest multicore margin in the dataset.

The closest relative gap appears in PassMark single-thread performance: 4,928 versus 3,977, a 19.3% delta. This narrower margin reflects the fact that both processors can boost to high frequencies, though the Ultra 7's 5.50 GHz boost clock still outpaces the Core 3's 4.30 GHz. Even in this best-case scenario for the Core 3, the Ultra 7 maintains a clear lead.

The average benchmark score tells the same story: the Ultra 7 265KF averages 71,910 across its benchmark suite, while the Core 3 305 averages 18,302. The Ultra 7 sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs in the database, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 3. In terms of nearest rivals, the Core 3 305 lands within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E (18,230), and within 0.2% of the Intel Core 5 330 (18,345). The Ultra 7 265KF, meanwhile, sits 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (71,797) and 0.6% below the Intel Xeon 6517P (72,350).

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is the superior processor in every measured category. For workloads that scale with core count, threading, or raw clock speed, the Ultra 7 delivers between 66.1% and 78% more performance than the Core 3 305 across the recorded benchmarks. The 20 cores and 20 threads of the Ultra 7, combined with a 5.50 GHz boost clock, produce results that the 6-core, 6-thread Core 3 cannot approach.

The Core 3 305 does hold advantages in form factor and power characteristics. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Ultra 7's 125 W, and its mobile market segment with Intel BGA 1516 socket indicates a design target for thin-and-light systems. The Ultra 7's desktop socket, Intel Socket 1851, and 125 W TDP place it firmly in high-performance desktop territory. The data shows two processors built for different purposes, but on raw benchmark performance, the Ultra 7 wins every single test.

The single-thread margin of 19.3% is the closest result, meaning the Core 3 305 is less disadvantaged in lightly threaded tasks. However, even there, the Ultra 7's superior boost clock and architecture deliver a decisive win. The Core 3 305's 72nd percentile ranking places it among mainstream mobile parts, while the Ultra 7's 94th percentile puts it near the top of the desktop heap.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests against the Intel Core 3 305. The Core 3 305 does not register a single victory.

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

A: The largest gap appears in PassMark data compression, where the Ultra 7 265KF scores 666,589 against the Core 3 305's 146,857, a 78% difference. The floating point math test shows a 77.7% gap, and integer math shows 77.5%.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded performance?

A: In PassMark single-thread testing, the Ultra 7 265KF scores 4,928 versus 3,977 for the Core 3 305, a 19.3% advantage. This is the narrowest margin in the entire benchmark set.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 305 boosts to 4.30 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ultra 7 265KF has an average benchmark score of 71,910, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 305 has an average score of 18,302, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core 3 305 operates with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the Ultra 7 265KF starts at 3.90 GHz and boosts to 5.50 GHz. The Core 3 uses 6 cores and 6 threads; the Ultra 7 uses 20 cores and 20 threads.

Thermal design power shows a stark contrast: 15 W for the Core 3 against 125 W for the Ultra 7. The socket types differ completely, with the Core 3 using Intel BGA 1516 for mobile integration and the Ultra 7 using Intel Socket 1851 for desktop builds.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 3 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 supports DDR5 only, but uses a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs by generation and lane count: the Core 3 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The Core 3 includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core; the Ultra 7 has no integrated graphics.

The Ultra 7 features an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Core 3 does not. Production status is Active for both, with the Core 3 releasing on 2026-04-15 and the Ultra 7 on 2024-10-23. The Core 3 has a launch MSRP of $309, and the Ultra 7 has a launch MSRP of $379.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) generation, while the Ultra 7 265KF uses the Arrow Lake-S codename under the Core Ultra Series 2, designated as Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake). Both processors are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ: Intel fabricates the Core 3, while TSMC fabricates the Ultra 7.

Cache hierarchies show significant structural differences. The Core 3 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7's per-core L2 design scales with its 20 cores, while the Core 3's smaller L2 pool reflects its mobile efficiency focus.

The Ultra 7 also reports transistor count and die size: 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 3 does not report these figures in the database. The Ultra 7's larger transistor budget and die area support its 20-core configuration and 30 MB L3 cache.

The market segments differ fundamentally: the Core 3 is a mobile processor, while the Ultra 7 is a desktop part. This architectural split explains the power, memory, and PCIe differences. The Core 3's integrated Xe3 graphics and single-channel memory serve thin-and-light mobile designs, while the Ultra 7's lack of integrated graphics and dual-channel memory target high-performance desktop systems with discrete GPUs.

The architecture differences translate directly into the benchmark outcomes. The Ultra 7's Arrow Lake architecture, with its larger core count and per-core L2 cache, sustains high throughput across multithreaded workloads. The Core 3's Wildcat Lake design, optimized for power efficiency, cannot match that performance envelope. The data confirms that these two processors occupy entirely different tiers, with benchmark results reflecting the architectural gulf between them.