Intel Core 3 N355 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the decisive winner in this comparison, delivering significantly higher performance across every single benchmark recorded in the database. The Intel Core 3 N355 is an efficient, low-power mobile processor, but the data shows it is outclassed by the Core Ultra 9 386H in all measured workloads. The choice between them is not about performance, but about the intended platform tier, as the Core 3 N355 targets a fundamentally different, lower-power segment.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Core 3 N355 failing to secure a single victory. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 9 386H is 43210, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 N355 has an average score of 13492 and sits in the 68th percentile. This places the Core Ultra 9 386H in a different performance class entirely, rivaling desktop processors like the Intel Core i9-12900 and i9-12900KF, which it leads by 0.7% and 0.9% respectively.

The Core 3 N355 is positioned for basic mobile computing. Its performance is comparable to the Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Core i5-9500, with delta percentages of 0% and 0.3% respectively. The data indicates that the Core 3 N355 is a competent processor for entry-level tasks, but it lacks the multi-core and single-core capability to compete with the Core Ultra 9 386H. The latter is the clear choice for any workload requiring high processing power, while the former suits scenarios where its low power envelope is more critical than raw speed.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins in every category. There are no benchmark tests where the Core 3 N355 demonstrates an advantage. The Core Ultra 9 386H's lead is substantial across all workload types, from single-threaded tasks to heavily multi-threaded applications.

The Core 3 N355's role is defined by its hardware specifications rather than its benchmark wins. Its 15 W TDP and single-channel memory support indicate a design focus on power efficiency and cost-effective integration, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal constraints are paramount. Its 8 cores and 8 threads are sufficient for everyday productivity, but the data shows it is not designed for demanding applications.

The Core Ultra 9 386H, with its 25 W TDP, 16 cores, and dual-channel memory support, is built for performance. Its benchmark results show it is capable of handling intensive workloads, including content creation, data compression, and complex calculations, with a level of speed that the Core 3 N355 cannot approach.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectural foundations. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, based on a 10 nm process node, and belongs to the Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) generation. It has 8 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz.

In contrast, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses the Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, belonging to the Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H) generation. It doubles the core count to 16 cores and 16 threads, with a higher base clock of 2.10 GHz and a significantly higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz. This newer, denser process node and higher core count are the primary drivers of its performance advantage.

Cache configurations also differ substantially. 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 9 386H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, a much larger 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and an 18 MB shared L3 cache. This larger cache hierarchy allows the Core Ultra 9 386H to store more data closer to the cores, reducing latency and improving throughput.

Memory support further separates the two. The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus, resulting in a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Core Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, achieving a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. This is a critical difference, as the Core Ultra 9 386H's superior memory bandwidth provides the data throughput necessary to feed its more powerful cores.

The integrated graphics also differ, with the Core 3 N355 featuring UHD Graphics 770 and the Core Ultra 9 386H featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics. The Core Ultra 9 386H also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes, while the Core 3 N355 is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes, indicating a more modern and faster I/O subsystem for the higher-end processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is significantly faster. In the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, it scores 20547 compared to the Core 3 N355's 5262, a difference of 74.4%.

Q: Is the Intel Core 3 N355 better in any way?

A: The benchmark data shows no performance wins for the Core 3 N355. Its advantage lies in its lower 15 W TDP and support for older DDR4 memory, which can be relevant for specific, power-sensitive mobile designs.

Q: How do their single-core performances compare?

A: The Core Ultra 9 386H is also the clear winner. In the Cinebench R23 single-core test, it scores 2071.5 versus the Core 3 N355's 1039, a 49.8% advantage.

Q: What type of memory does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus. The Core Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 386H compare to other high-end processors?

A: The database shows it has an average benchmark score of 43210, placing it in the 88th percentile. It is slightly ahead of the Intel Core i9-12900 and i9-12900KF, with delta percentages of 0.7% and 0.9%.

Q: What is the performance gap in integer math?

A: The Core Ultra 9 386H scores 87284 in the Passmark integer math test, while the Core 3 N355 scores 33894. This gives the Core Ultra 9 386H a 61.2% lead in this workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 9 386H dominates every recorded benchmark. Its largest victory comes in the Passmark find prime numbers test, where it scores 341 against the Core 3 N355's 27, a massive 92.1% advantage. This indicates a colossal difference in raw computational throughput.

In multi-core rendering tests, the Core Ultra 9 386H is consistently about 70-75% faster. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 3223 versus 822 (a 74.5% lead), and in Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 12820 versus 3612 (a 71.8% lead). The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows a similar gap, with the Core Ultra 9 386H scoring 20547 compared to 5262, a 74.4% difference.

The single-core performance gap, while smaller, is still substantial. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Core Ultra 9 386H scores 303.5 versus 168, a 44.6% lead. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 1809 versus 509, a 71.9% lead. The Passmark single-thread test shows a 49% lead for the Core Ultra 9 386H, with scores of 4218 and 2153.

Other workloads show similar patterns. In Passmark data compression, the Core Ultra 9 386H scores 352365 versus 117435, a 66.7% lead. In data encryption, it scores 27150 versus 8121, a 70.1% lead. The extended instructions test shows an 79.5% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 386H, with scores of 29138 and 5968. The Core Ultra 9 386H also excels in floating-point math, scoring 108527 against 22695, a 79.1% difference, and in physics, scoring 3028 against 625, a 79.4% difference. In random string sorting, the Core Ultra 9 386H leads with 42135 versus 14706, a 65.1% advantage. The multi-threaded Passmark score shows a 71.3% lead for the Core Ultra 9 386H, with 35399 versus 10174.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors, as recorded in the database:

| Specification | Intel Core 3 N355 | Intel Core Ultra 9 386H |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Series | None | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 1.90 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1264 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Twin Lake | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) | Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H) |

| 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) | 18 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 9 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

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

| Part Number | SRPNT | SA4R5Q9EH |

The data confirms that the Core Ultra 9 386H is a newer, more advanced processor with superior specifications in every category that impacts performance. The Core 3 N355 is an older, lower-power design with a smaller core count, slower clocks, less cache, and a narrower memory interface.