Intel Core 3 N355 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

The Intel Core 3 N355 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H represent two distinct tiers within Intel’s mobile processor lineup. The Core 3 N355 is an 8-core, 8-thread processor built on the Twin Lake architecture, while the Core Ultra 7 356H is a 16-core, 16-thread part based on Panther Lake. The benchmark data in the database shows a clear performance hierarchy, with the Core Ultra 7 356H dominating the Core 3 N355 across every single recorded test. The Core Ultra 7 356H holds a 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Core 3 N355 sits at the 68th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 356H is 41215, compared to 13492 for the Core 3 N355.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The performance gap between these two processors is substantial and consistent. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the Core Ultra 7 356H scored 3055, while the Core 3 N355 managed only 822. This represents a 73.1% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 356H. The single-core result in the same test shows a narrower but still significant gap: 303 versus 168, a 44.6% difference. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore scores are 12153 for the Core Ultra 7 356H and 3612 for the Core 3 N355, a 70.3% lead. The single-core R20 result shows the same 70.3% delta, with scores of 1715 and 509.

Cinebench R23 multicore results continue the pattern. The Core Ultra 7 356H produced 18395 points, while the Core 3 N355 scored 5262, a 71.4% difference. Single-core R23 scores are 2040 and 1039 respectively, a 49.1% gap. These Cinebench results indicate that the Core Ultra 7 356H delivers more than three times the multicore performance in R20 and R23, while the single-core advantage is roughly two times in R15 and R23.

The Passmark suite reinforces these findings across a wide range of workloads. In data compression, the Core Ultra 7 356H scored 336177 versus 117435 for the Core 3 N355, a 65.1% difference. Data encryption shows a 69.2% gap, with scores of 26345 and 8121. Extended instructions testing produced the largest percentage difference in the entire benchmark set: 27898 for the Core Ultra 7 356H compared to 5968 for the Core 3 N355, a 78.6% lead. Prime number finding, which can be sensitive to memory bandwidth and integer throughput, shows the most extreme disparity: 327 versus 27, a 91.7% difference.

Floating point math scores are 103128 for the Core Ultra 7 356H and 22695 for the Core 3 N355, a 78% gap. Integer math shows a 59.2% difference, with scores of 83111 and 33894. The multithread Passmark score is 33978 versus 10174, a 70.1% lead. Physics calculations score 2895 and 625, a 78.4% difference. Random string sorting shows a 64.1% gap, with scores of 40990 and 14706. Single-thread Passmark scores are 4072 for the Core Ultra 7 356H and 2153 for the Core 3 N355, a 47.1% difference.

The data shows no tests where the Core 3 N355 outperforms the Core Ultra 7 356H. Of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks recorded, the Core Ultra 7 356H wins all 17. The smallest advantage for the Core Ultra 7 356H appears in single-threaded workloads, while the largest advantages appear in prime number finding and extended instructions.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core Ultra 7 356H therefore has double the core and thread count.

Q: How do the single-core performances compare?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H leads in every single-core test. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 303 versus 168, a 44.6% advantage. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 1715 versus 509, a 70.3% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 2040 versus 1039, a 49.1% advantage. Passmark single-thread scores are 4072 versus 2153, a 47.1% difference.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H uses a dual-channel memory bus and supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, providing a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core 3 N355 uses a single-channel memory bus and supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, providing 38.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Core 3 N355 has a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Both processors share the same base clock of 1.90 GHz.

Q: Do both processors have the same integrated graphics?

A: No. The Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the Core 3 N355 uses UHD Graphics 770.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 356H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H has an average benchmark score of 41215. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with a score of 41208, a 0% difference. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 41263, which is 0.1% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41376, 0.4% higher, and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H scores 40967, 0.6% lower.

Architecture Differences

The architectural separation between these two processors is fundamental. The Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture and is part of the Core 3 generation, which the database lists under Alder Lake-N lineage. The Core Ultra 7 356H uses the Panther Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, identified as Panther Lake-H.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The Core 3 N355 is fabricated on Intel’s 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel’s 3 nm process node. Both are built by Intel as the foundry. The move to a smaller process node for the Core Ultra 7 356H allows for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency, though the database does not record transistor counts or die sizes for either part.

Cache hierarchies are substantially different. The Core 3 N355 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations on the Core Ultra 7 356H, combined with triple the L3 cache, support its higher instruction throughput and reduced memory latency.

Memory support also differentiates the two. The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus, with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This threefold difference in memory bandwidth directly impacts workloads that stream large datasets, such as data compression and random string sorting. The Core Ultra 7 356H leads data compression by 65.1% and random string sorting by 64.1%, which aligns with its wider memory interface.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 3 N355 provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 356H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The newer PCIe generation and additional lanes on the Core Ultra 7 356H offer higher bandwidth for external devices, though the database does not include specific device-level tests.

The physical sockets are different: the Core 3 N355 uses Intel BGA 1264, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540. This means the two processors are not interchangeable on the same motherboard. The Core Ultra 7 356H has a TDP of 25 watts, while the Core 3 N355 has a TDP of 15 watts. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either part. The release dates are separated by roughly one year, with the Core 3 N355 released on 2025-01-06 and the Core Ultra 7 356H released on 2026-01-04.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a decisive performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra 7 356H outperforms the Core 3 N355 in every recorded test, with advantages ranging from 44.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core to 91.7% in Passmark prime number finding. The average benchmark score of the Core Ultra 7 356H is 41215, which is roughly three times the 13492 average of the Core 3 N355.

The Core Ultra 7 356H sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, placing it near the upper tier of mobile processors. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with a 0% difference, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with a 0.1% higher score, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X with a 0.4% higher score, and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H with a 0.6% lower score. These narrow deltas indicate that the Core Ultra 7 356H is competitive within its performance class.

The Core 3 N355 sits at the 68th percentile, with an average score of 13492. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-12100F with a 0% difference, the Intel Core i5-9500 with a 0.3% higher score, the Intel Core 5 120UL with a 0.8% lower score, and the Intel Core i7-1250U with a 1.1% higher score. This places the Core 3 N355 in a more modest performance tier, aligned with older desktop and lower-power mobile parts.

For workloads that depend on multicore throughput, such as rendering or physics simulation, the Core Ultra 7 356H is the clear choice based on the data. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18395 is more than triple the 5262 of the Core 3 N355. For single-threaded responsiveness, the Core Ultra 7 356H also leads, though by a smaller margin. The Passmark single-thread score of 4072 versus 2153 still represents a near-doubling of performance.

The Core 3 N355, with its 15 watt TDP and 10 nm process, fits a different role. Its benchmark scores are lower across the board, but it consumes less power. The database does not include battery life or thermal measurements, so the practical impact of the TDP difference cannot be quantified here.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Both have a base clock of 1.90 GHz, but the boost clock differs: 3.90 GHz for the Core 3 N355 and 4.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 356H. The TDP is 15 watts for the Core 3 N355 and 25 watts for the Core Ultra 7 356H.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1264 for the Core 3 N355 and Intel BGA 2540 for the Core Ultra 7 356H. The architectures are Twin Lake versus Panther Lake, and the generations are listed as Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) versus Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H). The process nodes are 10 nm versus 3 nm, both from Intel as foundry.

Cache configurations differ in size and organization. The Core 3 N355 has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 for the Core 3 N355 versus DDR5, LPDDR5X for the Core Ultra 7 356H. The memory bus is single-channel versus dual-channel, and memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s.

PCIe support is Gen 3 with 9 lanes for the Core 3 N355 and Gen 5 with 12 lanes for the Core Ultra 7 356H. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Intel Xe3 Graphics. Neither processor supports ECC memory, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are listed as Active in production status. The Core 3 N355 uses part number SRPNT, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses SA4RGQ9EU.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 356H wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its largest margins appear in Passmark prime number finding, where it leads by 91.7%, and in Passmark extended instructions, where it leads by 78.6%. These tests emphasize raw integer throughput and instruction-level parallelism, both of which benefit from the Core Ultra 7 356H’s 16 cores, larger cache, and higher memory bandwidth.

In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Core Ultra 7 356H leads by 70.3%, and in Cinebench R23 multicore, it leads by 71.4%. These rendering workloads scale with core count and sustained throughput, and the 16-core design of the Core Ultra 7 356H delivers more than triple the multicore score of the 8-core Core 3 N355. Data compression and encryption workloads also favor the Core Ultra 7 356H, with leads of 65.1% and 69.2% respectively. These tasks are sensitive to memory bandwidth, and the dual-channel 115.2 GB/s interface of the Core Ultra 7 356H provides a clear advantage over the single-channel 38.4 GB/s interface of the Core 3 N355.

The smallest leads for the Core Ultra 7 356H appear in single-threaded tests. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 44.6% lead, Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 49.1% lead, and Passmark single-thread shows a 47.1% lead. These margins are still substantial, indicating that the Core Ultra 7 356H has a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz and a more efficient 3 nm process, but the single-thread gap is less extreme than the multicore gap.

The Core 3 N355 does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its role in a system would be defined by its lower 15 watt TDP and its support for DDR4 memory, which the Core Ultra 7 356H lacks. The Core 3 N355 also uses the UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, though the database includes no graphics benchmarks for either processor.

The Core 3 N355’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Core i5-9500, have average scores within 0.3% of its 13492. This indicates that the Core 3 N355 aligns with a mid-range performance tier. The Core Ultra 7 356H, with an average score of 41215, aligns with a high-performance tier that includes the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a desktop processor with a score 0.4% higher. The data confirms that the Core Ultra 7 356H is the stronger processor in every measured dimension, while the Core 3 N355 offers a lower-power alternative with a more limited performance envelope.