Intel Core 3 N350 vs Intel Core i7-7700HQ Comparison

The Intel Core 3 N350 and Intel Core i7-7700HQ represent two very different approaches to mobile computing, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The N350, a 2025 Twin Lake part, is a low-power, 8-core design built on Intel’s 10 nm process, while the i7-7700HQ is a 2017 Kaby Lake-H chip with 4 cores and 8 threads on a 14 nm node. The benchmark data reveals a surprisingly close overall contest, with the N350 winning 10 of the 17 head-to-head tests and the i7-7700HQ taking 7, yet the nature of those wins tells a compelling story about what each chip is optimized for.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 N350 establishes its dominance in compute-heavy, throughput-oriented workloads. In Cinebench, it wins every single test: R15 multicore (632 vs 589, +7.3%), R20 multicore (2635 vs 2457, +7.2%), R23 multicore (6274 vs 5852, +7.2%), and the corresponding single-core tests by similar margins (R23 single: 885 vs 826, +7.1%). This consistent 7% edge across all Cinebench versions suggests a fundamental IPC advantage from the newer Twin Lake architecture, despite the N350’s much lower 7W TDP compared to the i7-7700HQ’s 45W. The N350 also wins decisively in PassMark’s math tests: floating-point math (17781 vs 13678, +30%) and integer math (27669 vs 22143, +25%). Its biggest win by far is in data encryption, scoring 5693 vs 2366, a massive 140.6% advantage—likely reflecting dedicated cryptographic instructions on the newer core. The N350 also edges out the i7 in PassMark multithread (7382 vs 6881, +7.3%).

The Intel Core i7-7700HQ, despite its age, wins in several specialized and memory-sensitive workloads. Its most significant victories are in data compression (97136 vs 80444, +17.2% for the i7) and random string sorting (12512 vs 10102, +19.3%). These tasks rely heavily on memory bandwidth and cache efficiency, where the i7’s dual-channel memory bus and per-core 256 KB L2 cache (vs the N350’s 2 MB shared L2) provide an advantage. The i7 also wins in extended instructions (6218 vs 3981, -36% delta for N350), prime number finding (22 vs 20, -9.1%), and physics (489 vs 446, -8.8%). In single-threaded PassMark, the i7 wins narrowly (2045 vs 1974, -3.5% for the N350), and it also wins the duplicate PassMark single-thread test by the same margin.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the Core 3 N350 is the better all-round compute engine for modern multi-threaded and encryption-heavy tasks, while the Core i7-7700HQ holds its ground in legacy single-threaded and memory-latency-sensitive workloads. For users running modern rendering, encoding, or math-heavy applications, the N350’s consistent 7% lead in Cinebench and its 25-30% margins in math tests make it the practical choice. Its 140.6% encryption advantage is particularly striking for any workload involving secure data handling.

The i7-7700HQ’s wins are narrower in most cases (except compression and sorting, where it leads by 17-19%), and its single-thread PassMark lead is a slim 3.5%. Given that the N350 achieves its performance at a 7W TDP versus the i7’s 45W, the efficiency story is overwhelmingly in the N350’s favor. However, for users with software that relies on legacy vector instructions (extended instructions: 6218 vs 3981) or dual-channel memory access patterns (compression, sorting), the i7-7700HQ remains surprisingly competitive. The i7 is also the only one of the two with a launch MSRP of $378, though that figure reflects its 2017 market position.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive wins for the Core 3 N350 come in data encryption and floating-point math. The 140.6% delta in encryption (5693 vs 2366) is the single largest gap in the entire comparison, dwarfing any other difference. This suggests the N350’s architecture includes far more efficient AES or related cryptographic acceleration. In floating-point math, the N350’s 30% lead (17781 vs 13678) indicates a significantly stronger FPU per clock, which is unusual for a low-power part. The integer math win of 25% (27669 vs 22143) reinforces that the N350’s 8 cores are not just more numerous but also more capable per core in arithmetic throughput.

The i7-7700HQ’s biggest wins are in data compression (97136 vs 80444, a 16,692-point gap) and random string sorting (12512 vs 10102, a 2,410-point gap). Both of these are memory-latency and cache-bound workloads. The i7’s dual-channel DDR3/DDR4 support, combined with its per-core 256 KB L2 cache, gives it an edge when shuffling data around. Its win in extended instructions (6218 vs 3981) is also substantial, a 36% delta, indicating that the older Kaby Lake architecture has a more robust implementation of SIMD-style instructions. The physics test (489 vs 446) shows a smaller 8.8% lead for the i7, a modest but real advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core 3 N350 wins with a score of 6274 versus the i7-7700HQ’s 5852, a 7.2% advantage.

Q: What is the single largest performance gap between the two?

A: The N350 leads by 140.6% in PassMark data encryption (5693 vs 2366). The next largest gap is the i7’s 36% lead in extended instructions.

Q: Does the newer N350 win every benchmark?

A: No. The i7-7700HQ wins 7 of 17 tests, including data compression (+17.2%), random string sorting (+19.3%), and extended instructions (+36%).

Q: Which CPU has better single-thread performance?

A: It depends on the test. The N350 wins all Cinebench single-core tests (e.g., R23: 885 vs 826, +7.1%), while the i7-7700HQ wins PassMark single-thread (2045 vs 1974, +3.5%).

Q: How do their core counts compare?

A: The N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the i7-7700HQ has 4 cores and 8 threads. Both have 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which chip has the higher power draw?

A: The i7-7700HQ has a TDP of 45W, while the N350 has a TDP of just 7W, making the N350 significantly more power-efficient.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Core 3 N350 uses Twin Lake, which the fact pack lists as part of the "Core 3 (Alder Lake-N)" generation, on a 10 nm process. The i7-7700HQ uses Kaby Lake-H, on a 14 nm process. This node difference explains much of the efficiency gap: the N350 achieves higher Cinebench scores at a 7W TDP versus the i7’s 45W. The N350’s 8 cores are paired with a 96 KB L1 cache per core and a 2 MB shared L2, whereas the i7 has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core. Both share 6 MB of L3, but the N350’s L3 is shared across 8 cores, while the i7’s is shared across 4.

The N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus rated at 38.4 GB/s, while the i7 supports only DDR3 and DDR4 over a dual-channel bus. The N350’s integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770, compared to the i7’s Intel HD Graphics 630. The N350’s PCIe implementation is Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only), while the i7 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i7 is end-of-life, while the N350 is active production.

Specification Differences

The most striking specification difference is the TDP: 7W for the N350 versus 45W for the i7-7700HQ. Core counts differ (8 vs 4), though threads are equal at 8. Base clocks are far apart—0.10 GHz for the N350 versus 2.80 GHz for the i7—but boost clocks are close (3.90 GHz vs 3.80 GHz). The N350 uses a BGA 1264 socket, while the i7 uses BGA 1440. Memory support diverges: the N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 (single-channel), while the i7 supports only DDR3 and DDR4 (dual-channel). The N350 has a 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth rating; the i7 has no listed bandwidth. PCIe lanes differ (9 vs 16, both Gen 3). Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus HD Graphics 630. The process node is 10 nm versus 14 nm. The i7 has a 126 mm² die size; the N350 has no listed die size. Release dates are 2025-01-06 for the N350 and 2017-01-02 for the i7. The i7 has a launch MSRP of $378; the N350 has none listed.