AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, which claims 10 wins across the shared benchmark suite against 5 for the Intel Core 7 350. The margin is not subtle: the AMD part leads by double digits in most multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel chip secures its wins in single-threaded tests and one specialized integer task.

The largest gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 77,414 versus 33,734 for the Intel Core 7 350, a 129.5% advantage. This is the kind of result that separates a high-core-count design with simultaneous multithreading from a more modest six-thread part. Data compression follows a similar pattern: the AMD chip scores 256,603 against 143,123, a 79.3% lead. Random string sorting also favors AMD by 64.7%, with scores of 28,390 versus 17,238.

Cinebench multi-core results reinforce the trend. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 13,794 against 8,030 for the Intel Core 7 350, a 71.8% advantage. The R15 multi-core run shows a 65.8% lead, with 2,023 versus 1,220. PassMark multithread adds another data point: 22,125 versus 15,170, a 45.8% edge for AMD. Extended instruction performance also favors AMD by 49.7%, with 18,029 versus 12,045.

The AMD chip wins the remaining multi-threaded tests by narrower margins. Floating point math shows a 9.8% advantage, 46,996 versus 42,809. Physics simulation is closer still, with the AMD part leading by 7.2% at 1,257 versus 1,173. Data encryption rounds out the AMD wins with a 21.3% margin, 13,264 versus 10,933.

The Intel Core 7 350 takes the single-threaded contests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 2,046 against 1,958 for AMD, a 4.3% lead. The R15 single-core run shows Intel ahead by 7.2%, 292 versus 271. PassMark single-thread results agree: Intel scores 4,100 versus 3,862, a 5.8% margin, and the duplicate singlethread entry records the same numbers. The Intel chip also wins the PassMark find prime numbers test, scoring 107 versus 76, a 29% advantage. That test measures a specific scalar workload where Intel's per-core efficiency and clock behavior shine.

The average benchmark score tells the broader story. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 posts an average of 32,662 and sits at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 350 averages 17,779, placing it at the 71st percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H at 32,697 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32,707 (-0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F at 32,750 (-0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H at 32,812 (-0.5%). The Intel Core 7 350, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core 5 221TE at 17,860 (-0.5%), the AMD EPYC 9374F at 17,693 (+0.5%), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17,891 (-0.6%), and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17,898 (-0.7%).

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split maps cleanly onto workload type. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 dominates anything that scales with core count, thread count, and parallel execution. Its 8 cores and 16 threads give it a structural advantage over the Intel Core 7 350, which offers 6 cores and 6 threads. The database shows this in integer math, compression, sorting, encryption, extended instructions, and multi-core rendering. For content creation, data processing, or any task that can use more than six threads, the AMD part is the clear choice based on the recorded scores.

The Intel Core 7 350 wins in single-threaded scenarios. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,046 and PassMark single-thread score of 4,100 indicate higher per-core throughput. The find prime numbers result, 107 versus 76, suggests that scalar integer loops run faster on the Intel part. These are the kinds of workloads found in lightly threaded legacy applications, some spreadsheet operations, and certain interactive tasks. The Intel chip's base clock of 1.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz, combined with its 3 nm process node, deliver competitive single-core behavior despite the lower core count.

The AMD chip also has a meaningful edge in overall system throughput. PassMark physics, floating point math, and multithread scores all favor AMD, which means mixed workloads that combine floating point, physics simulation, and multiple concurrent threads will trend toward the AMD part. The Intel chip is not without merit in these areas, but the margins are consistently in AMD's favor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 wins every shared multi-core benchmark. The largest margins are in PassMark integer math (129.5% ahead), data compression (79.3% ahead), and Cinebench R23 multi-core (71.8% ahead).

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 350 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. The Intel Core 7 350 wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 7.2%, Cinebench R23 single-core by 4.3%, PassMark single-thread by 5.8%, and PassMark find prime numbers by 29%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 averages 32,662, while the Intel Core 7 350 averages 17,779. The AMD part sits at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs; the Intel part sits at the 71st percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each processor in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is within 0.5% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, Intel Core i5-14600T, AMD Ryzen 5 7400F, and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H. The Intel Core 7 350 is within 0.7% of the Intel Core 5 221TE, AMD EPYC 9374F, AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, and Intel Core 5 120U.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 7 350 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 350 support ECC memory?

A: No. The database lists ECC memory support as true for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 and false for the Intel Core 7 350.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 350 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD part has no simultaneous multithreading on its competitor, which explains the large multi-threaded gaps in the benchmarks.

Clock speeds differ modestly. The AMD chip has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel chip operates at 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The Intel part runs at a lower TDP of 15 watts against 28 watts for AMD, which reflects a more power-constrained design target.

Memory configuration diverges sharply. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 350 supports single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the memory bus width gives AMD a substantial bandwidth advantage.

PCIe lane counts also differ. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 880M, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

The sockets are incompatible. AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, while Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. The AMD part has a die size of 233 mm², while the Intel die size is not listed. The AMD part number is 100-000001571; the Intel part number is SAE3F. The Intel Core 7 350 has a launch MSRP of $469. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 is built on Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Point and belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation, which uses a hybrid of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename from the Core 5 generation and is built on a 3 nm process at Intel. The process node difference is notable: Intel's 3 nm process is one step ahead of AMD's 4 nm process in the database's node naming.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The AMD chip uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. The Intel chip uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core cache allocations support its single-threaded wins, while AMD's larger total L3 (8 MB versus 6 MB) and higher thread count drive its multi-threaded results.

The AMD chip supports ECC memory, while the Intel chip does not. This makes the AMD part more suitable for error-sensitive computing environments. The AMD chip also has a higher memory bandwidth figure (89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s) due to its dual-channel memory controller versus Intel's single-channel design.

The core count difference is architectural, not just numeric. The AMD part's 16 threads come from simultaneous multithreading on 8 cores, a feature the Intel Core 7 350 does not offer. The Intel part's 6 threads equal its core count, which limits its ability to extract parallelism from multi-threaded code. The benchmark data reflects this: the AMD part leads by 71.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core and by 129.5% in integer math, both workloads that scale with thread availability.

The process node and foundry differences also matter for power and clock behavior. Intel's 3 nm process at Intel foundry yields a 15-watt TDP part with a 4.80 GHz boost clock. AMD's 4 nm process at TSMC yields a 28-watt TDP part with a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The AMD part uses more power but delivers higher boost clocks and far higher multi-threaded throughput. The Intel part achieves its single-thread wins within a lower power envelope.