Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a sweeping, one-sided performance landscape. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with no victories recorded for the Intel Core 3 305. The margins, however, vary significantly by workload type. Single-threaded tests show the smallest gap, while multi-threaded and encryption workloads reveal the largest.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 28,477 against 13,123 for the Core 3 305, a 53.9% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core follows the same pattern: 11,960 versus 5,511, again a 53.9% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2,870 against 1,322, a 53.9% difference. The consistency of this multi-core margin across all three Cinebench versions suggests a stable scaling factor between the two parts, likely tied to core count and memory bandwidth.

Single-core Cinebench results tell a similar story with slightly different deltas. Cinebench R23 single-core records 4,020 for the Ultra 7 366H versus 1,852 for the Core 3 305, a 53.9% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1,688 against 777, a 54.0% margin. Cinebench R15 single-core delivers 405 versus 186, a 54.1% difference. These near-identical percentages indicate that the single-core advantage is as pronounced as the multi-core gap, not a case of a strong single-threaded part held back by limited cores.

PassMark integer math shows the Ultra 7 366H at 83,695 against 32,295, a 61.4% advantage, the largest delta in the entire benchmark set aside from prime number finding. Floating point math records 103,615 versus 42,284, a 59.2% margin. The data compression test gives 327,455 against 146,857, a 55.2% lead. Random string sorting shows 39,814 versus 17,623, a 55.7% gap. Extended instructions deliver 26,901 against 13,543, a 49.7% margin, the smallest multi-threaded delta recorded.

Data encryption produces the second-largest gap: 25,845 versus 11,019, a 57.4% advantage. Find prime numbers shows the largest relative difference, 326 against 115, a 64.7% margin. PassMark physics records 2,880 versus 1,233, a 57.2% lead. The PassMark multi-thread test gives 33,429 against 15,439, a 53.8% gap.

The narrowest margin appears in PassMark single-thread testing. The Ultra 7 366H scores 4,043, only 1.6% ahead of the Core 3 305's 3,977. This stands in sharp contrast to the Cinebench single-core results, which show a 54% gap. The discrepancy suggests the PassMark single-thread test exercises a different instruction mix or memory access pattern that reduces the advantage of the larger part.

The average benchmark score reflects the overall separation. The Core Ultra 7 366H averages 41,263, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 305 averages 18,302, landing in the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 7 366H include the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41,215 (0.1% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41,208 (0.1% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41,376 (0.3% ahead). The Core 3 305 sits within 0.4% of several competing parts, including the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18,318 and the Intel Core 5 330 at 18,345.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the dominant processor in every measured workload, from lightly threaded tasks to heavily parallel rendering and math workloads. Users whose workloads demand maximum throughput, such as rendering, data compression, encryption, or physics simulation, have no reason to consider the Core 3 305 based on these results.

The Core 3 305 remains a functional mobile processor, but its 72nd percentile standing and sub-18,400 average score place it near the middle of the database. Its closest rivals, the Intel Core i3-14100, Intel Core 5 330, Intel Core 7 360, and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E, all sit within 0.4% of its average score. This indicates the Core 3 305 is not an outlier in either direction; it performs exactly where its specifications suggest.

The 87th percentile placement of the Ultra 7 366H places it alongside the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H and AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, both of which are within 0.3% of its average score. The data shows the Ultra 7 366H delivers roughly 2.25 times the average benchmark score of the Core 3 305. For single-threaded workloads, the gap narrows considerably, with only a 1.6% difference in PassMark single-thread testing, so applications that rely primarily on single-core performance will see far less benefit from the higher-tier part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H uses the Panther Lake architecture and fits into the Core Ultra Series 3 generation with the Panther Lake-H variant.

Both processors are fabricated on a 3 nm process node at Intel. The Core 3 305 carries 6 cores and 6 threads, indicating no hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 366H carries 16 cores and 16 threads, also without hyper-threading, but with 10 additional physical cores.

Cache structures differ substantially. 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 366H lists 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation on the Ultra 7 means its total L2 capacity scales with the 16-core design, providing significantly more aggregate mid-level cache. The L3 cache is three times larger on the Ultra 7 366H.

Memory architecture diverges as well. The Core 3 305 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 366H uses a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, nearly double the throughput. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, and neither supports ECC memory.

PCI Express capabilities differ. The Core 3 305 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes. The Core Ultra 7 366H provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU-only lanes, doubling both the lane count and the interface generation.

Integrated graphics differ in naming. The Core 3 305 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core. The Core Ultra 7 366H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics without a core count specified in the database. Both are active production parts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several specification fields. The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clock speeds are 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 305 and 2.00 GHz for the Ultra 7 366H. Boost clocks reach 4.30 GHz on the Core 3 305 and 4.80 GHz on the Ultra 7 366H.

Thermal design power is 15 W for the Core 3 305 and 25 W for the Ultra 7 366H. Sockets differ: the Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540. The part numbers differ as well, SAE3L for the Core 3 305 and SA4R9Q9EL for the Ultra 7 366H.

Release dates are recorded in the database. The Core Ultra 7 366H has a release date of 2026-01-04, while the Core 3 305 has a release date of 2026-04-15, making the Ultra 7 the earlier launch. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 305 is $309; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 7 366H.

Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s for the Core 3 305 and 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 7 366H. Both use the same memory types and neither supports ECC. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 305. The Core 3 305 records zero wins in the database.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 7 366H scores 28,477 versus 13,123, a 53.9% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 11,960 versus 5,511, also a 53.9% lead.

Q: Is the single-threaded gap as large as the multi-threaded gap?

A: Cinebench single-core tests show a similar margin, around 54%. However, PassMark single-thread testing shows only a 1.6% difference, with scores of 4,043 versus 3,977.

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

A: The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How do the cache configurations compare?

A: The Core 3 305 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 366H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core 3 305 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 366H uses a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.