Intel Core 3 N355 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a decisive sweep. The Intel Core 7 360 wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 N355. The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 7 360 scores 13,634 against 5,262 for the Core 3 N355, a delta of -61.4%. This means the Core 7 360 delivers over 2.5 times the multi-threaded rendering throughput in that test. The single-core gap is also substantial: in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 7 360 scores 1,924 versus 1,039, a -46% delta. That result indicates a significantly stronger per-thread performance profile.

Looking at the older Cinebench releases, the pattern holds. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 7 360 manages 1,374 while the Core 3 N355 posts 822, a -40.2% delta. The R15 single-core test shows a narrower but still clear lead for the Core 7 360: 193 versus 168, a -13% delta. Cinebench R20 follows the same trajectory: multi-core 5,726 against 3,612 (-36.9%), and single-core 808 against 509 (-37%). The single-core margin in R20 is proportionally larger than in R15, suggesting the Core 7 360's clock advantage becomes more impactful under heavier sustained loads.

PassMark results reinforce the dominance. In multi-thread testing, the Core 7 360 scores 15,544 versus 10,174, a -34.5% delta. Single-thread PassMark scores show an enormous difference: 4,274 versus 2,153, a -49.6% delta. The Core 7 360 nearly doubles the Core 3 N355 in single-threaded PassMark performance. Data compression also favors the Core 7 360: 142,877 versus 117,435, a -17.8% delta. Data encryption shows a -27.3% delta (11,164 versus 8,121). Extended instructions testing reveals a -51.8% delta (12,390 versus 5,968), indicating a major advantage in workloads that utilize SIMD or specialized instruction sets.

Prime number finding is where the largest relative gap appears: the Core 7 360 scores 120 versus just 27 for the Core 3 N355, a -77.5% delta. This test is highly sensitive to integer throughput and memory latency, and the Core 7 360's architecture clearly handles it far more efficiently. Floating-point math also shows a near-doubling: 44,963 versus 22,695, a -49.5% delta. Integer math is the only close call in the entire dataset: 34,238 versus 33,894, a -1% delta. That result suggests both processors have comparable integer execution resources per clock, even though the Core 7 360 still edges ahead. Physics simulation shows 1,213 versus 625, a -48.5% delta. Random string sorting completes the sweep: 17,636 versus 14,706, a -16.6% delta.

The average benchmark score of the Core 7 360 is 18,374, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 N355 averages 13,492, sitting in the 68th percentile. The nearest rival to the Core 7 360 is the Intel Core i3-13100 with an average score of 18,380 (0% delta), while the Core 3 N355's closest rival is the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13,494 (0% delta). These percentile positions confirm that the Core 7 360 operates in a higher performance tier entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge substantially at the architectural level. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process node. The process node difference alone explains much of the efficiency and clock behavior observed in the benchmarks. Both chips are built by Intel's foundry, but the 3 nm node allows the Core 7 360 to reach a boost clock of 4.80 GHz against the Core 3 N355's 3.90 GHz, despite both having a 15 W TDP. The base clocks differ as well: 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360 versus 1.90 GHz for the Core 3 N355.

Core configuration is another key differentiator. The Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Core 7 360 wins every multi-threaded benchmark, which indicates that its per-core performance advantage outweighs the two-core deficit. The Core 7 360 also uses a different cache hierarchy: it has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 3 N355 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 allocation on the Core 7 360 likely contributes to its single-threaded dominance.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory, while the Core 7 360 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a single-channel memory bus, but the Core 7 360 achieves 59.7 GB/s bandwidth versus 38.4 GB/s for the Core 3 N355. That bandwidth increase is substantial for memory-sensitive workloads like prime number finding and data compression. PCIe support also differs: the Core 3 N355 provides Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes, while the Core 7 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are another point of divergence. The Core 3 N355 includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Core 7 360 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core 7 360's graphics architecture is newer and designed for higher throughput, though the benchmark data does not include graphics-specific scores. The Core 7 360 also has a launch MSRP of $426, while the Core 3 N355 has no recorded launch price. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 N355 uses socket Intel BGA 1264, and the Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516.

Release timing matters for context: the Core 3 N355 was released on 2025-01-06, and the Core 7 360 on 2026-04-15. Both are marked as active production parts in the mobile segment. The Core 3 N355 is listed under the Core 3 generation with Alder Lake-N lineage, while the Core 7 360 is listed under the Core 5 generation with Wildcat Lake lineage, despite carrying the Core 7 name. ECC memory is not supported on either processor.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 7 360 outperforms the Intel Core 3 N355 in every recorded benchmark, with deltas ranging from -1% in integer math to -77.5% in prime number finding. The Core 7 360's average benchmark score of 18,374 places it at the 72nd percentile, while the Core 3 N355's 13,492 places it at the 68th percentile. The Core 7 360 is directly comparable to desktop-class chips like the Intel Core i3-13100 and i3-14100, which score 18,380 and 18,318 respectively, while the Core 3 N355 aligns with the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13,452.

For workloads that stress single-threaded performance, the Core 7 360 is the only rational choice based on the data. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4,274 is nearly double the Core 3 N355's 2,153. For multi-threaded rendering workloads, the Core 7 360's Cinebench R23 score of 13,634 versus 5,262 represents a massive advantage that no core-count difference can offset. The Core 3 N355 does offer more cores and threads, but the benchmark results show that those additional cores do not translate into superior throughput in any tested scenario.

The Core 7 360 also leads in memory bandwidth (59.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s) and uses a more advanced 3 nm process, which supports its higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 3 N355's advantages are limited to a higher base clock (1.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz) and broader memory type support including DDR4, which may matter in legacy system configurations. However, no benchmark in the dataset rewards those attributes.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 3 N355 | Intel Core 7 360 |

|-------|-------------------|------------------|

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 1.90 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1264 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Twin Lake | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (shared) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 9 Lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Release Date | 2025-01-06 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $426 |

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core 7 360 scores 13,634 in R23 multi-core versus 5,262 for the Core 3 N355, a -61.4% delta.

Q: Does the Core 3 N355 win any benchmark?

A: No. The recorded data shows the Core 7 360 winning all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with zero wins for the Core 3 N355.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each processor?

A: The Core 3 N355 has 38.4 GB/s bandwidth on a single-channel bus, while the Core 7 360 has 59.7 GB/s on a single-channel bus.

Q: What process nodes do these chips use?

A: The Core 3 N355 uses a 10 nm process node, and the Core 7 360 uses a 3 nm process node.

Q: How do their single-thread PassMark scores compare?

A: The Core 7 360 scores 4,274 in PassMark single-thread testing, while the Core 3 N355 scores 2,153, a -49.6% delta.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 360 wins across every benchmark category in the database. Its largest margins are in prime number finding (-77.5%), Cinebench R23 multi-core (-61.4%), and extended instructions (-51.8%). These results indicate that the Core 7 360 is particularly strong for integer-heavy computation, multi-threaded rendering, and workloads that leverage advanced instruction sets. The smaller margins in integer math (-1%) and random string sorting (-16.6%) show that the Core 3 N355 remains competitive in basic integer arithmetic and string manipulation tasks, but it still loses those tests.

The Core 3 N355's best relative performance appears in integer math, where it trails by only 1%. This suggests that for pure integer addition and multiplication loops, the two chips are nearly equivalent. The Core 3 N355 also comes relatively close in data compression (-17.8%), which may reflect its higher core count providing some parallel throughput in that specific workload. However, these are relative comparisons, not wins.

The Core 7 360's advantages are most pronounced in single-threaded workloads, where its boost clock of 4.80 GHz and 3 nm process deliver nearly double the PassMark single-thread score of the Core 3 N355. For users running software that depends heavily on single-core performance, such as older applications or lightly threaded database queries, the Core 7 360 provides a substantial speedup. For multi-threaded workloads like video encoding or 3D rendering, the Core 7 360's per-core efficiency allows it to outperform the Core 3 N355 despite having two fewer cores.

The Core 3 N355 may still serve in scenarios where DDR4 memory support is required, since the Core 7 360 only supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Core 3 N355 also offers more PCIe lanes (9 versus 6), though on an older Gen 3 standard. These platform-level differences are not reflected in the benchmark scores, but they may influence system design decisions. The Core 7 360 holds the performance crown in every measured metric, and the data does not reveal any workload category where the Core 3 N355 takes the lead.