Intel Arc G3 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Arc G3 versus the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H. The recorded data shows zero benchmark entries for the Arc G3, meaning there are no Cinebench, PassMark, or other standardized scores available for comparison. The Core Ultra 7 356H, by contrast, has a full suite of 17 benchmark scores recorded.

For the Core Ultra 7 356H, the strongest multi-threaded result appears in Cinebench R23 multicore with a score of 18,395 points. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it records 12,153 points, and in the older Cinebench R15 multicore test, it scores 3,055 points. Single-core performance is comparatively modest: Cinebench R23 singlecore shows 2,040 points, R20 singlecore shows 1,715 points, and R15 singlecore shows 303 points.

The PassMark suite for the Core Ultra 7 356H reveals a distinct workload profile. The highest absolute score is in data compression at 336,177 points, followed by multithread at 33,978 points, extended instructions at 27,898 points, and data encryption at 26,345 points. Floating point math reaches 103,128 points, while integer math scores 83,111 points. Random string sorting completes at 40,990 points, and single-thread performance is recorded at 4,072 points in both PassMark single_thread and singlethread tests. Physics simulation scores 2,895 points, and find prime numbers is the lowest at 327 points.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 356H is 41,215 points, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database. This percentile indicates it outperforms the vast majority of recorded processors. The Arc G3, lacking any benchmark data, sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero, which reflects the absence of measurements rather than actual performance.

The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 7 356H provide context for its standing. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 41,208 points, a delta of 0 percent, meaning the two are statistically tied. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 41,263 points, a delta of -0.1 percent, indicating the 356H trails by a negligible margin. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41,376 points, a delta of -0.4 percent, again a near tie. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H scores 40,967 points, a delta of 0.6 percent, showing the 356H holds a slight edge. These delta values confirm the 356H operates within a tight performance cluster, with no rival exceeding a 0.6 percent difference.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Arc G3 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists zero benchmarks for the Arc G3, with an average benchmark score of 0 and no nearest rivals. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 17 recorded scores across Cinebench and PassMark tests.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 356H compare to its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440?

A: The two are effectively tied. The Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 averages 41,208 points versus 41,215 for the 356H, a delta of 0 percent.

Q: What is the single-thread performance of the Core Ultra 7 356H?

A: PassMark records 4,072 points for single-thread performance. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows 2,040 points, R20 singlecore shows 1,715 points, and R15 singlecore shows 303 points.

Q: Which workload produces the highest score for the Core Ultra 7 356H?

A: Data compression in PassMark leads with 336,177 points. This is more than triple its multithread score of 33,978 points and over four times its integer math score of 83,111 points.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 7 356H a high-performing CPU relative to all processors in the database?

A: Yes. It sits in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 41,215 points. Its nearest rivals all score within a 0.6 percent range, confirming it is a top-tier mobile processor.

Q: Does the Arc G3 have a higher core count than the Core Ultra 7 356H?

A: No. The Arc G3 has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 356H wins every category where data exists, purely because the Arc G3 has no recorded benchmarks. For multi-threaded workloads, the 356H delivers strong results: Cinebench R23 multicore at 18,395 points and R20 multicore at 12,153 points demonstrate substantial parallel processing capability. PassMark multithread at 33,978 points corroborates this strength.

For data-intensive tasks, the 356H excels. Data compression at 336,177 points is its standout result, indicating efficient handling of compression algorithms. Data encryption at 26,345 points and extended instructions at 27,898 points further show aptitude for cryptographic and SIMD workloads. Floating point math at 103,128 points confirms strong numerical computation, while integer math at 83,111 points supports general arithmetic-heavy applications.

For single-threaded tasks, the 356H records 4,072 points in PassMark, which is competitive given its nearest rivals all score within 0.6 percent in average performance. The Cinebench singlecore scores of 2,040 (R23), 1,715 (R20), and 303 (R15) provide additional reference points.

The Arc G3 cannot claim any wins because no measurement exists. Its 14 cores and 25 TDP match the 356H in power envelope, but without benchmark data, any performance claim would be speculative. The database shows winsA as 0 for the Arc G3 and winsB as 0 for the 356H, indicating the absence of direct head-to-head tests rather than a tie.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several specifications. Both have a base clock of 1.90 GHz, a TDP of 25 watts, and use the Intel BGA 2540 socket. Both are mobile segments, active production status, and lack an unlocked multiplier. Both have identical cache hierarchies: 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Neither supports ECC memory, and both use dual-channel memory buses.

Key differences emerge in core counts. The Arc G3 has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Boost clocks differ slightly: the Arc G3 reaches 4.60 GHz, while the 356H reaches 4.70 GHz.

Memory support diverges. The Arc G3 supports only LPDDR5X, while the 356H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth also differs significantly: the Arc G3 records 136.5 GB/s, whereas the 356H records 115.2 GB/s. This means the Arc G3 has a bandwidth advantage despite having fewer cores.

PCIe connectivity differs markedly. The Arc G3 provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the 356H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The 356H offers triple the PCIe lane count, which could benefit discrete GPU or NVMe configurations.

Integrated graphics differ. The Arc G3 uses Arc B370 graphics, while the 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. Part numbers also differ: SA4QZ for the Arc G3 and SA4RGQ9EU for the 356H.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Panther Lake architecture, use a 3 nm process node, and are fabricated by Intel. The Arc G3 is designated as generation "Arc G3 (Panther Lake)", while the 356H is designated as "Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H)". This naming indicates the 356H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, whereas the Arc G3 has no series designation in the database.

The core count difference of 14 versus 16 cores directly reflects the architecture tier. The Arc G3 lacks the two extra cores found in the 356H, which likely contributes to the 356H's higher multi-threaded scores, though no direct benchmark for the Arc G3 exists to confirm this.

Cache architecture is identical in structure: per-core L1 and L2 allocations match, and the shared L3 is 18 MB on both. This means the additional cores in the 356H do not come with additional shared cache, potentially increasing contention per core under heavy multi-threaded loads.

Memory controller differences are notable. The Arc G3 supports only LPDDR5X with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, while the 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but with lower bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s. The Arc G3's higher bandwidth could improve performance in memory-bound scenarios, but its fewer cores may limit overall throughput.

PCIe lane counts indicate different platform positioning. The Arc G3's 4 lanes suggest a more constrained I/O design, while the 356H's 12 lanes allow for more expansion. Both are CPU-only lanes, meaning chipset-provided lanes are not counted.

Integrated graphics differ: Arc B370 on the Arc G3 versus Intel Xe3 Graphics on the 356H. The Arc branding on the G3 suggests a more graphics-focused design, but no benchmark data confirms relative iGPU performance.

The release dates differ: the 356H launched on January 4, 2026, while the Arc G3 launched on May 27, 2026. The 356H precedes the Arc G3 by roughly five months, indicating a staggered product rollout within the same Panther Lake family.

The Verdict

The database presents an asymmetric comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has comprehensive benchmark coverage, while the Intel Arc G3 has none. This means any verdict must be drawn from the 356H's measured performance and the G3's specification profile.

The 356H delivers strong multi-threaded performance, as shown by its 18,395 points in Cinebench R23 multicore and 33,978 points in PassMark multithread. Its 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms it is a high-performing mobile processor. Its nearest rivals all score within 0.6 percent, meaning the 356H is tightly competitive with top alternatives like the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H.

The Arc G3, with 14 cores and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, offers a lower core count and slightly lower boost clock than the 356H. However, it has higher memory bandwidth at 136.5 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s, which could benefit certain workloads. Its PCIe lane count of 4 is substantially lower than the 356H's 12 lanes, limiting expansion options.

For users who require measured performance data, the Core Ultra 7 356H is the only choice with validated scores. Its single-thread PassMark of 4,072 points and multi-thread Cinebench results provide concrete expectations. The Arc G3, lacking any recorded scores, cannot be assessed on performance grounds. Its higher memory bandwidth and Arc B370 integrated graphics are notable specifications, but without benchmarks, their practical impact remains unknown.

The 356H also offers more cores (16 versus 14), a higher boost clock (4.70 GHz versus 4.60 GHz), and broader memory support (DDR5 and LPDDR5X versus LPDDR5X only). The Arc G3 counters with higher memory bandwidth and a later release date, but these advantages do not translate into measurable wins in the database.

For multi-threaded productivity, content creation, or data-heavy workloads, the Core Ultra 7 356H is the supported choice, backed by its Cinebench and PassMark scores. For users who prioritize memory bandwidth or integrated graphics branding, the Arc G3 offers those specifications, but the absence of benchmark data means no performance validation exists. The verdict from the recorded data is clear: the Core Ultra 7 356H is the only processor with demonstrated performance, and it performs at a high level relative to its nearest rivals.