Intel Core 3 N355 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H dominates the Intel Core 3 N355 across every single benchmark recorded in the database. The data shows a clean sweep, with the Core Ultra 7 366H winning all 17 head-to-head comparisons. The largest margin of victory appears in the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 326 versus the Core 3 N355's 27, a delta of -91.7 percent. This indicates a massive advantage in raw integer calculation throughput, a workload that often scales directly with core count and clock speed.

In multi-core rendering workloads, the Core Ultra 7 366H delivers 2870 points in cinebench_r15_multicore against 822 for the Core 3 N355, a -71.4 percent delta. The gap widens further in cinebench_r23_multicore, where the Core Ultra 7 366H posts 28477 points compared to 5262 for the Core 3 N355, a -81.5 percent difference. These results confirm that the Core Ultra 7 366H is in a different performance class for heavily threaded tasks like 3D rendering and video encoding.

Single-core performance also favors the Core Ultra 7 366H decisively. In cinebench_r23_singlecore, the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 4020 versus 1039 for the Core 3 N355, a -74.2 percent delta. The passmark_single_thread test shows a slightly smaller but still substantial gap, with 4043 points for the Core Ultra 7 366H and 2153 for the Core 3 N355, a -46.7 percent difference. This suggests that the Core Ultra 7 366H not only has more cores but also significantly higher per-core efficiency.

Memory and data-intensive workloads follow the same pattern. The passmark_data_compression test shows 327455 for the Core Ultra 7 366H against 117435 for the Core 3 N355, a -64.1 percent delta. Floating-point math performance is equally lopsided: 103615 for the Core Ultra 7 366H versus 22695 for the Core 3 N355, a -78.1 percent difference. The Core Ultra 7 366H also leads in passmark_extended_instructions with 26901 versus 5968, a -77.8 percent delta, and in passmark_integer_math with 83695 versus 33894, a -59.5 percent difference.

The passmark_multithread score reinforces the multi-core story, with the Core Ultra 7 366H at 33429 and the Core 3 N355 at 10174, a -69.6 percent delta. Even in less common workloads like random string sorting and physics simulation, the Core Ultra 7 366H leads comfortably: 39814 versus 14706 (-63.1 percent) and 2880 versus 625 (-78.3 percent), respectively. Data encryption shows a -68.6 percent delta, with 25845 for the Core Ultra 7 366H and 8121 for the Core 3 N355.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different architectural generations and process nodes. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process by Intel. It belongs to the Core 3 generation, which the database categorizes under Alder Lake-N. The Core Ultra 7 366H, by contrast, uses the Panther Lake architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process, also by Intel. It belongs to the Ultra 7 generation, specifically Panther Lake-H, and is part of the Core Ultra Series 3.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 366H doubles that to 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts match core counts in both cases. The Core Ultra 7 366H also runs at higher clock speeds: its base clock is 2.00 GHz versus 1.90 GHz for the Core 3 N355, and its boost clock reaches 4.80 GHz versus 3.90 GHz. Thermal design power also differs, with the Core 3 N355 rated at 15 watts and the Core Ultra 7 366H at 25 watts.

Cache hierarchies are fundamentally different in scale and organization. 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 366H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation in the Core Ultra 7 366H is particularly notable, as it suggests a design optimized for low-latency access to working sets.

Memory support also separates the two. The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus, yielding 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, delivering 115.2 GB/s. That is three times the memory bandwidth, which directly impacts many of the benchmark results shown above. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Core 3 N355 provides Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 366H provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are different generations. The Core 3 N355 carries UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, but the architectural gap between these iGPU solutions is consistent with the overall generational divide. Sockets also differ: the Core 3 N355 uses Intel BGA 1264, and the Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540, meaning they are not interchangeable in any system.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has an average benchmark score of 41263, while the Intel Core 3 N355 has an average benchmark score of 13492.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H leads in every single-core test. In cinebench_r23_singlecore, it scores 4020 versus 1039 for the Core 3 N355, a -74.2 percent delta. In passmark_single_thread, it scores 4043 versus 2153, a -46.7 percent delta.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor supports additional threads beyond its core count.

Q: What process nodes are used for each processor?

A: The Core 3 N355 is built on a 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 7 366H is built on a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: How does memory bandwidth differ between the two?

A: The Core 3 N355 uses a single-channel memory bus and delivers 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 366H uses a dual-channel bus and delivers 115.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 3 N355 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, which is three times less.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows the following differences between the Intel Core 3 N355 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H:

• Cores: 8 versus 16
• Threads: 8 versus 16
• Base Clock: 1.90 GHz versus 2.00 GHz
• Boost Clock: 3.90 GHz versus 4.80 GHz
• TDP: 15 watts versus 25 watts
• Socket: Intel BGA 1264 versus Intel BGA 2540
• Architecture: Twin Lake versus Panther Lake
• Generation: Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) versus Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H)
• Process Node: 10 nm versus 3 nm
• L1 Cache: 96 KB per core versus 192 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 2 MB shared versus 2.5 MB per core
• L3 Cache: 6 MB shared versus 18 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 versus DDR5, LPDDR5X
• Memory Bus: Single-channel versus Dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 3, 9 Lanes versus Gen 5, 12 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 770 versus Intel Xe3 Graphics
• Release Date: 2025-01-06 versus 2026-01-04
• Part Number: SRPNT versus SA4R9Q9EL

The percentile rankings also differ. The Core 3 N355 sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core Ultra 7 366H sits at the 87th percentile.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H outperforms the Intel Core 3 N355 in every recorded workload, with deltas ranging from -46.7 percent in single-threaded tests to -91.7 percent in prime number finding. The Core Ultra 7 366H also holds a massive advantage in average benchmark score: 41263 versus 13492, nearly three times higher.

Looking at nearest rivals in the database gives context for each chip's standing. The Core 3 N355 has an average score of 13492, placing it essentially even with the Intel Core i3-12100F, which scores 13494 with a delta of 0 percent. It also sits within 1.1 percent of the Intel Core i7-1250U (13351) and within 0.8 percent of the Intel Core 5 120UL (13594). This places the Core 3 N355 in the upper-mid range of mobile processors.

The Core Ultra 7 366H, with an average score of 41263, sits in a much higher performance tier. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41215, a delta of 0.1 percent. It also rivals the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, which scores 41376, placing the Core Ultra 7 366H within 0.3 percent of that desktop-class chip. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 is nearly identical at 41208, a 0.1 percent delta.

For users comparing these two specific processors, the Core Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice on every performance metric recorded. The Core 3 N355 operates at a lower TDP (15 watts versus 25 watts), which may be relevant for power-constrained designs, but the performance gap is so large that this advantage carries little weight in most scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 366H wins in all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. There are no recorded workloads where the Core 3 N355 comes out ahead. The Core Ultra 7 366H shows its largest advantages in prime number finding (-91.7 percent), multi-core rendering in cinebench_r23 (-81.5 percent), and floating-point math (-78.1 percent). These are all workloads that benefit from high core counts, high clock speeds, and large cache hierarchies.

The Core 3 N355 has no benchmark wins, but its profile suggests a different role. With a 15 watt TDP, 8 cores, and a 3.90 GHz boost clock, it fits into low-power mobile designs where the 25 watt TDP of the Core Ultra 7 366H might be prohibitive. Its single-channel memory bus and Gen 3 PCIe further indicate a design aimed at basic productivity and media consumption rather than heavy compute.

The Core Ultra 7 366H, by contrast, is positioned for demanding mobile workloads. Its dual-channel memory delivers 115.2 GB/s, its Gen 5 PCIe supports fast peripheral connectivity, and its 16 cores with per-core L2 cache make it suitable for parallel processing tasks like video editing, software compilation, and scientific computing. The data shows that in any scenario where CPU throughput matters, the Core Ultra 7 366H is the appropriate selection.