Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Core Ultra 7 356H posts the higher score, with the Intel Core 3 305 failing to claim a single win. The margin is substantial in almost every category, ranging from a 2.3% edge in single-threaded Passmark work to a 64.8% advantage in prime number finding. The average benchmark score confirms the gap: the Core Ultra 7 356H averages 41215 points against 18302 for the Core 3 305, placing the former in the 87th percentile of all CPUs and the latter in the 72nd.

The Core 3 305, however, is not without context. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 average score, a 0.1% difference, and the Intel Core 5 330 at 18345, a 0.2% difference. It also sits close to the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E, which scores 18230 and is 0.4% behind. This indicates that the Core 3 305 performs in line with its direct competition class, even if it is decisively outpaced by the higher-tier Ultra 7. The Core Ultra 7 356H, by comparison, matches the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 exactly at 0.0% delta, trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H by 0.1%, and sits 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a desktop-class part. The data shows two processors aimed at different segments, and the benchmark results reflect that positioning clearly.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a 3 nm process node and Intel as the foundry, but they diverge sharply in every other structural respect. The Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 356H is built on the Panther Lake architecture, specifically the Panther Lake-H generation under the Core Ultra Series 3 family. The Core 3 305 offers 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 356H provides 16 cores and 16 threads, also without multithreading, but with more than double the physical core count.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Core 3 305 lists 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 356H lists 192 KB per core for L1, 2.5 MB per core for L2, and 18 MB of shared L3. The per-core L2 notation on the Ultra 7 implies a larger total cache hierarchy, and the L3 pool is three times the size of the Core 3 305. Clock speeds also favor the Ultra 7: a 1.90 GHz base clock and 4.70 GHz boost versus 1.50 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost for the Core 3 305.

Memory architecture is another major split. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the Core 3 305 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s. That is a doubling of available memory bandwidth. PCIe support differs as well: the Core 3 305 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 356H provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ, with the Core 3 305 featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe unit and the Core Ultra 7 356H featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics without a specified execution unit count. Sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 3 305 versus Intel BGA 2540 for the Core Ultra 7 356H. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both are locked.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins every multi-core benchmark in the database. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 18395 against 13123 for the Core 3 305, a 28.7% advantage. The gap widens in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Ultra 7 scores 12153 versus 5511, a 54.7% lead.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H leads in single-core tests, but by a smaller margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 2040 versus 1852, a 9.2% difference. Passmark single-thread shows 4072 versus 3977, a 2.3% edge for the Ultra 7.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H uses a dual-channel memory bus and delivers 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core 3 305 uses a single-channel bus and delivers 59.7 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory.

Q: Are the two processors socket compatible?

A: No. The Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540. They are physically incompatible.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 3 305 has 6 MB of shared L3. L1 and L2 are listed as 192 KB and 2.5 MB for the Core 3 305, while the Ultra 7 lists 192 KB per core and 2.5 MB per core.

Q: What is the launch date difference?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H was released on 2026-01-04, while the Core 3 305 was released on 2026-04-15. Both are currently marked as active production parts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 305 | Intel Core Ultra 7 356H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 16 |

| Threads | 6 | 16 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Panther Lake |

| Architecture | Not specified | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

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

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | Not specified |

The two chips share the same process node, foundry, memory type support, lack of ECC, locked multiplier status, and mobile market segment. Everything else in the specification sheet points to the Core Ultra 7 356H as the larger, more capable part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, but the magnitude of the win varies by workload. The largest single margin appears in Passmark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 7 scores 327 against 115 for the Core 3 305, a 64.8% difference. This workload is heavily dependent on integer throughput and core count, and the 16-core part dominates. Passmark integer math shows a similar pattern: 83111 versus 32295, a 61.1% lead. Passmark floating point math follows at 103128 versus 42284, a 59% advantage.

Encryption and compression workloads also favor the Ultra 7 heavily. Passmark data encryption scores 26345 versus 11019, a 58.2% gap. Passmark data compression scores 336177 versus 146857, a 56.3% difference. Passmark random string sorting shows 40990 versus 17623, a 57% lead, and Passmark physics delivers 2895 versus 1233, a 57.4% edge. Passmark extended instructions, a test of SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, records 27898 versus 13543, a 51.5% difference. Passmark multithread shows 33978 versus 15439, a 54.6% lead.

Cinebench results follow the same trend. The R15 multi-core test shows 3055 versus 1322, a 56.7% gap. R20 multi-core shows 12153 versus 5511, a 54.7% difference. R23 multi-core narrows the margin to 28.7%, with 18395 versus 13123, suggesting that the longer-duration workload partially closes the gap. Single-core Cinebench results show smaller but still decisive wins: R15 single-core at 303 versus 186 is a 38.6% lead, R20 single-core at 1715 versus 777 is a 54.7% lead, and R23 single-core at 2040 versus 1852 is a 9.2% lead.

The closest contest in the entire dataset is Passmark single-thread, where the Ultra 7 scores 4072 and the Core 3 305 scores 3977, a 2.3% difference. This indicates that the Core 3 305 is not far behind in lightly threaded single-core performance, despite its lower boost clock of 4.30 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. The average benchmark score of 41215 for the Ultra 7 against 18302 for the Core 3 305, a difference of roughly 125%, summarizes the overall performance separation. The data confirms that the Core Ultra 7 356H is the stronger processor in every recorded workload, with the Core 3 305 remaining competitive only in narrow single-thread scenarios.