Intel Core 3 N355 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

The Intel Core 3 N355 and Intel Core Ultra X7 358H are both mobile processors from Intel, but the recorded data separates them by a wide margin. The N355 has an average benchmark score of 13,492 and sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra X7 358H has an average benchmark score of 40,967 and sits at the 87th percentile. In the 17 head-to-head tests, the Ultra X7 wins all 17, while the N355 wins none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided across both Cinebench and PassMark. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N355 scores 822 against 3,027 for the Ultra X7, a delta of -72.8%. The single-core R15 result is closer: 168 versus 301.5, a -44.3% delta. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 3,612 versus 12,011, a -69.9% delta, and R20 single-core shows 509 versus 1,695, a -70% delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core records 5,262 versus 18,747, a -71.9% delta, while R23 single-core records 1,039 versus 2,080, a -50% delta. The single-core deltas are consistently smaller than the multi-core deltas, but the Ultra X7 still wins every entry.

PassMark results follow the same pattern. Data compression: 117,435 versus 332,508, a -64.7% delta. Data encryption: 8,121 versus 26,046, a -68.8% delta. Extended instructions: 5,968 versus 27,274, a -78.1% delta. Find prime numbers: 27 versus 337, a -92% delta, the largest gap in the set. Floating point math: 22,695 versus 103,842, a -78.1% delta. Integer math: 33,894 versus 83,147, a -59.2% delta. Multithread: 10,174 versus 33,802, a -69.9% delta. Physics: 625 versus 3,021, a -79.3% delta. Random string sorting: 14,706 versus 40,357, a -63.6% delta. Single-thread: 2,153 versus 4,124, a -47.8% delta. The database also lists a duplicate PassMark singlethread entry with identical scores and delta.

The largest Ultra X7 wins come in prime-number finding, physics, extended instructions, and floating point math, all with deltas of -78.1% or worse. The N355’s best relative showings are Cinebench R15 single-core at -44.3%, PassMark single-thread at -47.8%, and Cinebench R23 single-core at -50%, but those are still decisive losses.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ at the foundation level. The N355 uses a 10 nm process with the Twin Lake codename, while the Ultra X7 uses a 3 nm process with the Panther Lake codename. The N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads; the Ultra X7 has 16 cores and 16 threads. Both list a 1.90 base clock, but the boost clock is 3.90 on the N355 and 4.80 on the Ultra X7. TDP is 15 W for the N355 and 25 W for the Ultra X7. Sockets also differ: Intel BGA 1264 versus Intel BGA 2540.

The cache hierarchy is substantially different. The N355 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X7 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support moves from DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 on a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth to LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The PCIe interface changes from Gen 3 with 9 lanes to Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Integrated graphics change from UHD Graphics 770 to Arc B390.

The platform details also differ. The N355 generation is listed as Core 3 (Alder Lake-N), while the Ultra X7 generation is listed as Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H). The Ultra X7 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3; the N355 has no series listed. Release dates are 2025-01-06 for the N355 and 2026-01-04 for the Ultra X7. Part numbers are SRPNT for the N355 and SA4RAQ9ET for the Ultra X7.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded head-to-head results contain no benchmark win for the Core 3 N355. The closest contest is Cinebench R15 single-core, where the N355 scores 168 against 301.5 and trails by 44.3%. PassMark single-thread is similar: 2,153 versus 4,124, a 47.8% deficit. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1,039 versus 2,080, a 50% deficit. These are the three smallest deltas in the set, which means the N355 is least disadvantaged in lightly threaded workloads.

The Core Ultra X7 358H wins every test. Its biggest margins are in PassMark find prime numbers (27 versus 337, -92%), physics (625 versus 3,021, -79.3%), extended instructions (5,968 versus 27,274, -78.1%), and floating point math (22,695 versus 103,842, -78.1%). It also leads by 69.9% in Cinebench R20 multi-core and PassMark multithread, by 71.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and by 68.8% in data encryption. The workload split is therefore one-sided. Rendering, physics, encryption, compression, sorting, and math workloads all favor the Ultra X7. Single-threaded tasks produce the narrowest gap, but the Ultra X7 still leads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra X7 358H has an average benchmark score of 40,967, while the Core 3 N355 averages 13,492. The Ultra X7 sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs; the N355 sits at the 68th percentile.

Q: How many head-to-head tests did each processor win?

A: The head-to-head set contains 17 tests. The Core Ultra X7 358H wins all 17; the Core 3 N355 wins none.

Q: What is the largest single-test gap between the two?

A: In PassMark find prime numbers, the N355 scores 27 and the Ultra X7 scores 337, a delta of -92% for the N355.

Q: What is the smallest gap?

A: In Cinebench R15 single-core, the N355 scores 168 and the Ultra X7 scores 301.5, a delta of -44.3%. PassMark single-thread is close at -47.8% with scores of 2,153 and 4,124.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra X7 supports LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The N355 uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra X7 uses Arc B390.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 N355 | Intel Core Ultra X7 358H |

| Series | Not listed | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Architecture | Twin Lake | Not listed |

| Codename | Twin Lake | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) | Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Boost clock | 3.90 | 4.80 |

| TDP | 15 | 25 |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1264 | Intel BGA 2540 |

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

| L2 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 9 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc B390 |

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

| Part number | SRPNT | SA4RAQ9ET |

Both parts share the same manufacturer, foundry, base clock, ECC support, market segment, production status, and locked multiplier.

The Verdict

The database’s average scores, percentiles, and head-to-head deltas all point the same direction. The Core Ultra X7 358H is the higher-performance processor in this comparison. Its average score is 40,967 versus 13,492, its percentile is 87 versus 68, and it wins 17 of 17 recorded tests. The N355’s only relative strength is that its single-thread deficits are smaller, but they remain in the 44.3% to 50% range.

Nearest-rival context reinforces the gap. The N355’s average score is essentially tied with the Core i3-12100F at 13,494 and 0.3% above the Core i5-9500 at 13,452. It also sits 0.8% below the Core 5 120UL at 13,594 and 1.1% above the Core i7-1250U at 13,351. The Ultra X7’s average score is 0.6% below the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41,208 and 0.6% above the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G at 40,718. The two processors occupy different performance tiers.

The data does not identify any workload in which the N355 wins. The N355 is the lower-power part at 15 W, while the Ultra X7 is rated at 25 W, but every recorded benchmark favors the Ultra X7. The verdict is unambiguous: the Core Ultra X7 358H dominates the Core 3 N355 across the measured benchmark set.