Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance advantage for the Intel Core 3 305 across every recorded test. The most dramatic separation appears in multi-core workloads, where the Core 3 305 delivers results that are multiples of the Intel Processor N150's output.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 3 305 scores 13123 against 2590.5 for the N150, a 406.6% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Core 3 305 records 1322 versus 422.5, a 212.9% lead. These results indicate that the Core 3 305's additional cores and higher sustained clocks translate into substantially higher throughput in heavily threaded workloads.

Single-core performance also favors the Core 3 305, though the margin is narrower. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 3 305 scores 1852 against 935, a 98.1% advantage. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the lead compresses to 21.4%, with scores of 186 versus 153.15. The R15 single-core result stands out as the closest contest in the head-to-head data, suggesting that the N150's architecture is less disadvantaged in shorter, less demanding single-thread tasks.

The Core 3 305 wins all four head-to-head benchmarks, with zero wins for the N150. Beyond the direct comparisons, the broader benchmark suite reinforces the gap. The Core 3 305 records an average benchmark score of 18302, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.1% below), the Intel Core 5 330 at 18345 (0.2% below), the Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 (0.4% below), and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E at 18230 (0.4% above). This places the Core 3 305 in a tightly clustered group of mid-range processors.

The N150's average benchmark score is 1025, placing it in the 28th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T at 1024 (0.1% below), the Intel Core i3-4340 at 1026 (0.1% above), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U at 1024 (0.1% below), and the Intel Core i7-5650U at 1027 (0.2% above). The N150 sits in a cluster of older or lower-end parts, and its percentile ranking confirms it is positioned far down the performance distribution.

PassMark data for the Core 3 305 shows particularly strong results in data compression (146857), floating point math (42284), integer math (32295), and multithreading (15439). Single-thread PassMark scores reach 3977, while extended instructions score 13543. Data encryption scores 11019, random string sorting scores 17623, and find prime numbers returns 115. Physics scoring yields 1233. These figures are not directly mirrored in the N150's recorded benchmarks, but the Cinebench results alone establish the performance hierarchy.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear choice for users prioritizing raw performance. The Intel Core 3 305 dominates every recorded benchmark, with multi-core leads exceeding 200% and reaching as high as 406.6%. Its 72nd percentile ranking versus the N150's 28th percentile underscores the separation. The Core 3 305 also sits within 0.4% of several mid-range rivals, including the Intel Core i3-14100, Core 5 330, Core 7 360, and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E, meaning it competes at a level far above the N150.

The Intel Processor N150 is not without a role. Its 6 W TDP against the Core 3 305's 15 W TDP indicates a much lower power envelope, making it suitable for scenarios where energy efficiency is the primary concern. The N150's 0.1 GHz base clock and 3.6 GHz boost clock, paired with 4 cores and 4 threads, suggest a design focused on light, intermittent workloads rather than sustained heavy computation. Its production status is active, and it launched in late 2024, two years before the Core 3 305's 2026 release.

For workloads that are heavily threaded, such as compilation, rendering, or data processing, the Core 3 305 is the only rational choice based on the recorded scores. For single-threaded tasks, the Core 3 305 still leads, though the R15 single-core margin of 21.4% shows the N150 is relatively less disadvantaged there. Users who require the highest possible performance per the data should select the Core 3 305, while those who prioritize minimal power draw and have modest performance requirements may consider the N150.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 leads by 212.9% in Cinebench R15 multi-core and by 406.6% in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

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

A: The Core 3 305 leads by 21.4% in Cinebench R15 single-core and by 98.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Core 3 305 has an average benchmark score of 18302, while the N150 has an average benchmark score of 1025.

Q: How do their percentile rankings differ?

A: The Core 3 305 ranks in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, while the N150 ranks in the 28th percentile.

Q: Which processor uses more power?

A: The Core 3 305 has a TDP of 15 W, compared to the N150's 6 W TDP.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: The Core 3 305's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-14100, Core 5 330, Core 7 360, and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E, all within 0.4%. The N150's nearest rivals are the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T, Intel Core i3-4340, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, and Intel Core i7-5650U, all within 0.2%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Intel Processor N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 305 versus 0.10 GHz for the N150, and boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 3.60 GHz. TDP is 15 W versus 6 W.

Sockets differ as well: the Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the N150 uses Intel BGA 1264. Memory support also diverges. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. Both use single-channel memory buses, but memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s for the Core 3 305 versus 38.4 GB/s for the N150.

PCIe configurations differ, with the Core 3 305 offering Gen 4 at 6 lanes (CPU only) and the N150 offering Gen 3 at 9 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 3 305 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe), while the N150 uses UHD Graphics 730. Both are classified as mobile parts, and both have locked multipliers.

The Core 3 305 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the N150 has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates are 2026-04-15 for the Core 3 305 and 2024-11-19 for the N150. Part numbers are SAE3L for the Core 3 305 and SRPNR for the N150.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 305 is built on a 3 nm process node, while the N150 uses a 10 nm node, both fabricated by Intel. The Core 3 305's codename is Wildcat Lake, and its generation is listed as Core 3 (Wildcat Lake). The N150's architecture is Twin Lake, with a codename of Twin Lake and a generation listed as Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N).

Cache configurations differ in structure. The Core 3 305 has 192 KB of L1 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache, with 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The N150 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of shared L2 cache, with 6 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 6 MB of L3, but the L1 and L2 layouts are not directly comparable due to the per-core versus total designations.

Neither processor supports ECC memory. Neither has a listed transistor count or die size in the database. The architecture differences align with the performance gap: the newer 3 nm node, higher core count, and larger L2 cache on the Core 3 305 correspond to its substantial benchmark advantages. The N150's older 10 nm node and lower core count are consistent with its lower power footprint and reduced performance ceiling.