Intel Core 3 100UL vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 100UL boosts to 4.50 GHz. The base clocks are 1.90 GHz and 1.20 GHz, respectively.

Q: What process nodes do these processors use?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL uses a 10 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 10 MB on the Intel Core 3 100UL.

Q: What memory types are supported?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H supports LPDDR5X memory. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: How does the integrated graphics differ?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL includes UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H includes Arc B390 graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H dominates in nearly every measurable category. Its 16-core configuration, combined with a 3 nm process and 18 MB L3 cache, delivers substantially higher scores in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. The PassMark results also favor the Ultra X7 across integer math, floating point math, encryption, compression, physics, and sorting workloads. Its percentile ranking of 87 versus 50 for the Core 3 100UL confirms a wide performance gap.

The Intel Core 3 100UL has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its advantages are limited to non-performance characteristics: it uses the Intel Socket 1700, supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and has a lower 15 W TDP. For a desktop platform with flexible memory choices and lower power draw, it remains a viable option despite lacking benchmark scores.

The data shows no instance where the Core 3 100UL outperforms the Ultra X7 358H in any recorded test. Every available benchmark score belongs to the Ultra X7, which also holds a far higher average benchmark score of 40967. The Core 3 100UL has an average benchmark score of zero in the database, meaning no recorded test results exist for it.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 3 100UL is built on Raptor Lake, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, and belongs to the Core 3 generation. It uses a 10 nm process and has 6 cores with 8 threads. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and its PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). It integrates UHD Graphics 64EU and is classed as a desktop part.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, uses the Panther Lake codename, and is part of the Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H) generation. It is built on a 3 nm process and has 16 cores with 16 threads. Its cache structure is significantly larger: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is limited to LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). It integrates Arc B390 graphics and is classed as a mobile part.

The differences in process node, core count, cache hierarchy, memory type, and PCIe generation indicate a newer, more advanced design in the Ultra X7 358H. The 3 nm process versus 10 nm is a major architectural leap. The Panther Lake-H design targets mobile platforms with high performance per watt, while the Raptor Lake-PS design serves desktop systems with a broader memory compatibility range.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads, while the Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clock is 1.20 GHz for the Core 3 and 1.90 GHz for the Ultra X7. Boost clock is 4.50 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. TDP is 15 W for the Core 3 and 25 W for the Ultra X7.

The socket differs: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 3, Intel BGA 2540 for the Ultra X7. The process node is 10 nm versus 3 nm. L1 cache per core is 80 KB versus 192 KB, L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB versus 3 MB, and shared L3 cache is 10 MB versus 18 MB.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 3, LPDDR5X for the Ultra X7. The Ultra X7 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s; the Core 3 has no recorded memory bandwidth value. PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the Core 3, Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the Ultra X7. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 64EU versus Arc B390. The market segment is Desktop for the Core 3 and Mobile for the Ultra X7.

The release dates differ as well. The Core 3 100UL was released on 2024-04-07, while the Ultra X7 358H was released on 2026-01-04. Neither processor has a launch MSRP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The part number for the Ultra X7 is SA4RAQ9ET, while the Core 3 part number is unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H holds all recorded benchmark scores. The Intel Core 3 100UL has no benchmark entries in the database, so the comparison is one-sided. The recorded data includes Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 results, plus PassMark tests for compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime numbers, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra X7 scores 3027 points. Single-core in R15 is 301.5 points. In Cinebench R20, multi-core reaches 12011 points and single-core reaches 1695 points. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers 18747 points, with single-core at 2080 points. These results reflect strong scaling from the 16-core design and the 4.80 GHz boost clock.

PassMark results reinforce the same pattern. Integer math scores 83147, floating point math scores 103842, and extended instructions score 27274. Data encryption scores 26046, while data compression scores 332508. The multithread score is 33802, physics scores 3021, and random string sorting scores 40357. Find prime numbers scores 337, and single-thread performance is recorded at 4124 (the database lists this twice, once as passmark_single_thread and once as passmark_singlethread, with identical values).

The average benchmark score for the Ultra X7 is 40967, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with an average score of 41208 and a delta of -0.6%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H with 41215 and -0.6%, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G with 40718 and +0.6%, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with 41263 and -0.7%. These deltas are small, indicating the Ultra X7 sits in a tightly contested performance band.

The Core 3 100UL sits in the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero and no nearest rivals listed. This makes any direct head-to-head benchmark comparison impossible from the recorded data. The only conclusion available is that the Ultra X7 has extensive recorded performance data, while the Core 3 has none.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is the clear performance leader based on the recorded data. Its 16 cores, 16 threads, 4.80 GHz boost clock, 18 MB L3 cache, and 3 nm process node produce benchmark results that place it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The Cinebench multi-core scores, particularly the R23 result of 18747 points, confirm strong multithreaded capability. PassMark results across integer math, floating point math, encryption, compression, and physics all show high throughput.

The Intel Core 3 100UL, with no recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile ranking, cannot be evaluated on performance from this database. Its specifications suggest a desktop-oriented design with 6 cores, 8 threads, a 4.50 GHz boost clock, and 10 MB L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which provides platform flexibility, and its 15 W TDP indicates low power draw. For desktop builds where memory choice matters and power efficiency is prioritized, it may serve a purpose, but no benchmark evidence supports a performance claim.

The Ultra X7 358H targets mobile platforms with LPDDR5X memory, a 25 W TDP, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. Its nearest rivals are all within roughly one percentage point in average score, which places it in a competitive field. The recorded data shows it performs on par with the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H.

For users choosing between these two processors, the decision depends on platform and workload. The Ultra X7 358H is the only one with measured performance, and that performance is strong across all tested workloads. The Core 3 100UL offers desktop socket compatibility and dual memory type support but lacks any recorded scores to demonstrate capability. The database clearly favors the Ultra X7 358H in every available metric.