Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

The Intel Core 3 305 and Intel Core Ultra 9 288V are both active mobile processors from Intel, but they occupy very different positions in the lineup. The Core 3 305 is a 6-core, 6-thread part from the Wildcat Lake family, while the Core Ultra 9 288V is an 8-core, 8-thread Lunar Lake flagship. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner, but one significant workload reverses the trend. The Core Ultra 9 288V wins 16 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, yet the Core 3 305 claims the single most demanding multi-threaded render test. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 9 288V is 23219, placing it in the 76th percentile, while the Core 3 305 averages 18302 and sits in the 72nd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V dominates across nearly every measured workload. In the PassMark suite, it wins data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single thread tests. Its lead in single-threaded performance is consistent: 6.9% ahead in PassMark single thread and 5% ahead in Cinebench R23 single core. The Core Ultra 9 288V also takes all three older Cinebench versions, including R15, R20, and the single-core portion of R23.

The Core 3 305 has exactly one head-to-head victory, and it is a decisive one. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 3 305 scores 13123 against 10178 for the Core Ultra 9 288V, a 28.9% advantage. This is not a small margin; it suggests that the Core 3 305 sustains its multi-threaded throughput better under the specific conditions of that workload. No other test in the database shows the Core 3 305 ahead.

For users focused on single-thread responsiveness, the Core Ultra 9 288V is the stronger option across the board. For long render jobs that resemble Cinebench R23 multicore, the data points to the Core 3 305. The split is unusual: a lower-tier 6-core chip beating a higher-tier 8-core chip in one render test while losing every other comparison.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V is the superior processor for general compute tasks. Its average benchmark score of 23219 is 26.9% higher than the Core 3 305's 18302. The Core Ultra 9 288V also ranks higher in the overall percentile distribution, at 76 versus 72. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-11900F and AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, both desktop-class performers, which puts its performance level into context.

The Core 3 305 is the correct choice only for workloads that mirror Cinebench R23 multicore. That single test result, a 28.9% win, cannot be ignored for users whose primary application is that exact type of multi-threaded rendering. However, the Core 3 305 loses the other two multicore Cinebench tests by 16.5% (R15) and 22% (R20), so its R23 result appears workload-specific rather than a general multi-thread advantage.

The Core Ultra 9 288V is the safer pick for mixed usage, productivity, and any single-thread-sensitive application. The Core 3 305 is a niche pick for a narrow set of render workloads. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 305 is $309; the Core Ultra 9 288V has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is Cinebench R23 multicore. The Core 3 305 scores 13123, the Core Ultra 9 288V scores 10178, giving the Core 3 305 a 28.9% lead. This is the only test where the Core 3 305 wins, and the margin is larger than most of the Core Ultra 9 288V's victories.

The Core Ultra 9 288V's biggest wins come in Cinebench R15 single core and PassMark prime number finding. In R15 single core, the Core Ultra 9 288V scores 301.5 against 186, a 38.3% advantage. In prime number finding, it scores 195 against 115, a 41% lead. These are the two largest deltas in the entire head-to-head set.

In multi-threaded PassMark tests, the Core Ultra 9 288V leads by 22.1% in multithread (19810 vs 15439), 22.1% in random string sorting (22622 vs 17623), and 22.1% in data encryption (14141 vs 11019). The consistent 22.1% delta across these three tests suggests a uniform throughput advantage, likely tied to its higher core count and clock speeds.

Floating point and integer math also favor the Core Ultra 9 288V. It scores 59536 in floating point math versus 42284, a 29% lead, and 44019 in integer math versus 32295, a 26.6% lead. Extended instructions show a smaller but still clear 13.3% lead (15613 vs 13543).

In Cinebench R20, the Core Ultra 9 288V wins multicore by 22% (7069 vs 5511) and single core by 22.1% (997 vs 777). In Cinebench R15 multicore, it wins by 16.5% (1583 vs 1322). The R23 single core result is the closest single-thread contest: 1950 vs 1852, a 5% lead for the Core Ultra 9 288V. PassMark single thread shows a 6.9% lead (4274 vs 3977).

Data compression goes to the Core Ultra 9 288V by 21.3% (186521 vs 146857). Physics follows with a 24.7% lead (1637 vs 1233). Across all 17 comparisons, the Core Ultra 9 288V's average delta is roughly 20% or more in most tests, with single-thread tests being the narrowest margins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has an average benchmark score of 23219, compared to 18302 for the Intel Core 3 305.

Q: Does the Core 3 305 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Core 3 305 wins Cinebench R23 multicore with a score of 13123 against 10178, a 28.9% advantage.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The Core Ultra 9 288V leads by 6.9% in PassMark single thread (4274 vs 3977) and by 5% in Cinebench R23 single core (1950 vs 1852).

Q: What is the biggest margin in any test?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark prime number finding, where the Core Ultra 9 288V leads by 41% (195 vs 115). The second largest is Cinebench R15 single core at 38.3% (301.5 vs 186).

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded PassMark tests?

A: The Core Ultra 9 288V leads by 22.1% in multithread, random string sorting, and data encryption. It leads by 24.7% in physics.

Q: Which processor ranks higher among all CPUs?

A: The Core Ultra 9 288V is in the 76th percentile, while the Core 3 305 is in the 72nd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families. The Core 3 305 is built on the Wildcat Lake architecture and uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket. The Core Ultra 9 288V uses the Lunar Lake architecture and the Intel BGA 2833 socket. Both are manufactured on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ: the Core 3 305 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 9 288V is fabricated by TSMC.

The Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads, two more cores than the Core 3 305's 6 cores and 6 threads. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz and boost clock is 5.10 GHz, compared to 1.50 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost for the Core 3 305. The Core Ultra 9 288V also has a higher TDP of 30 watts versus 15 watts.

Cache configurations 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 9 288V has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation on the Lunar Lake part is notable, giving each core its own 2.5 MB slice.

The integrated graphics are different as well. The Core 3 305 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Core Ultra 9 288V uses the Arc 140V. The Core Ultra 9 288V also supports a different memory type: LPDDR5X only, while the Core 3 305 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Specification Differences

The Core Ultra 9 288V holds the advantage in core count, clock speeds, and power envelope. It has 8 cores and 8 threads versus 6 cores and 6 threads. Its base clock of 3.30 GHz is more than double the Core 3 305's 1.50 GHz, and its 5.10 GHz boost exceeds the 4.30 GHz boost of the Core 3 305. The TDP difference is 30 watts for the Core Ultra 9 288V and 15 watts for the Core 3 305.

Memory bandwidth is another clear differentiator. The Core Ultra 9 288V uses a dual-channel memory bus and reaches 136.5 GB/s, while the Core 3 305 is single-channel with 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 9 288V also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes, whereas the Core 3 305 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes.

The cache hierarchy differs in L2 and L3. The Core 3 305 has 2.5 MB of L2 and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 288V has 2.5 MB of L2 per core and 12 MB of shared L3. The L1 cache is listed as 192 KB for the Core 3 305 and 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 9 288V.

Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309; the Core Ultra 9 288V has no launch MSRP recorded. The release dates differ, with the Core Ultra 9 288V released on 2024-09-23 and the Core 3 305 released on 2026-04-15. The Core Ultra 9 288V belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family, while the Core 3 305 has no series designation.