Intel Core 5 130HL vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H holds a decisive advantage across every recorded benchmark in the database. The Core Ultra 7 356H posts an average benchmark score of 41,215, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs tested, while the Core 5 130HL has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile. The margin is substantial in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

In Cinebench R23, the Core Ultra 7 356H delivers a multi-core score of 18,395 and a single-core score of 2,040. For context, the Core Ultra 7 356H sits within 0.1% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H (average score 41,263) and within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (average score 41,376). The nearest rival on the lower side is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at an average score of 41,208, a 0% delta, meaning the Core Ultra 7 356H and that chip are statistically tied in aggregate performance. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H trails by 0.6% with an average score of 40,967.

Cinebench R20 results show a similar pattern: the Core Ultra 7 356H scores 12,153 in multi-core and 1,715 in single-core. The older Cinebench R15 run yields 3,055 multi-core and 303 single-core. These scores indicate that the Core Ultra 7 356H maintains strong scaling from legacy to current rendering workloads, with the multi-core advantage growing as thread counts and instruction complexity increase.

PassMark results reinforce the multi-threaded strength of the Core Ultra 7 356H. The multithread score sits at 33,978, with integer math at 83,111 and floating point math at 103,128. Data compression reaches 336,177, while data encryption hits 26,345. Extended instructions score 27,898. The single-thread PassMark score is 4,072, and find prime numbers comes in at 327. Random string sorting scores 40,990, and physics simulation scores 2,895.

The Core 5 130HL has no benchmark entries in the database, so direct head-to-head numbers cannot be cited. However, the gap in percentile placement (50th versus 87th) and the complete absence of recorded scores for the Core 5 130HL indicate that the Core Ultra 7 356H is the only one of the two with verified performance data. The Core Ultra 7 356H also exceeds its nearest rivals by a small but consistent margin in aggregate score, with a 0.6% lead over the Core Ultra X7 358H and a 0.1% deficit to the Core Ultra 7 366H, which is within measurement noise.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H compare to its closest rivals in the database?

A: The Core Ultra 7 356H has an average benchmark score of 41,215. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 41,208 (0% delta), the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 41,263 (-0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41,376 (-0.4% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H scores 40,967 (+0.6% delta). The Core Ultra 7 356H is effectively tied with the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 and slightly behind the Core Ultra 7 366H and Ryzen 9 5900X.

Q: What is the strongest benchmark result for the Core Ultra 7 356H?

A: The highest single score is PassMark data compression at 336,177. In rendering, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,395 is the strongest, followed by Cinebench R20 multi-core at 12,153.

Q: Does the Core 5 130HL have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the Core 5 130HL, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its percentile versus all CPUs is 50, compared to 87 for the Core Ultra 7 356H.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Core Ultra 7 356H?

A: The recorded memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s. The Core 5 130HL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Core 5 130HL has 12 cores and 16 threads. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning the Core Ultra 7 356H adds four physical cores but the same thread count.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two chips?

A: The Core 5 130HL uses a 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins in every measured category because it is the only one of the two with recorded benchmarks. The data shows clear strengths in multi-threaded rendering, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 18,395 and R20 multi-core at 12,153. For productivity workloads, PassMark integer math at 83,111 and floating point math at 103,128 indicate strong general compute capability. The data compression score of 336,177 suggests efficiency in archival and database-style workloads, while the encryption score of 26,345 points to capable security-related processing.

The Core Ultra 7 356H also demonstrates credible single-thread performance. Cinebench R23 single-core at 2,040 and PassMark single-thread at 4,072 show that it does not sacrifice per-core speed for its multi-core count. The physics score of 2,895 and random string sorting score of 40,990 round out a profile suited to simulation and sorting tasks.

The Core 5 130HL has no recorded wins because no benchmark data exists. The database shows it as a desktop part with 12 cores, a 2.60 GHz base clock, and a 4.80 GHz boost clock, but without scores, its performance cannot be quantified. The 50th percentile placement is a default position, not a measured result.

For users relying on benchmark-verified performance, the Core Ultra 7 356H is the only defensible choice based on the recorded data. The Core 5 130HL remains an unquantified option, and its suitability for any workload cannot be assessed from the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every core specification. The Core 5 130HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 5 130HL runs at a 2.60 GHz base clock and 4.80 GHz boost clock, while the Core Ultra 7 356H runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The Core 5 130HL has a 45 W TDP, the Core Ultra 7 356H has a 25 W TDP.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. The Core 5 130HL has 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core. Both share 18 MB L3.

Memory support diverges: the Core 5 130HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory, while the Core Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core 5 130HL has no memory bandwidth figure.

PCIe capabilities differ. The Core 5 130HL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 130HL uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

The socket and form factor differ. The Core 5 130HL uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop market segment. The Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540 and targets the mobile market segment.

Release dates differ: the Core 5 130HL launched on 2024-04-07, while the Core Ultra 7 356H launched on 2026-01-04. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The Core 5 130HL is built on Raptor Lake architecture (codename Raptor Lake-PS) and belongs to the Core 5 generation. The Core Ultra 7 356H is built on Panther Lake architecture (codename Panther Lake) and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, specifically the Ultra 7 generation (Panther Lake-H).

The process nodes are generations apart. The Core 5 130HL uses a 10 nm Intel process, while the Core Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm Intel process. The 3 nm node represents a significant density and power efficiency improvement over 10 nm, which aligns with the TDP difference: 45 W for the Core 5 130HL versus 25 W for the Core Ultra 7 356H despite the latter having more cores.

Cache architecture differs in per-core allocation. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 192 KB L1 per core versus 80 KB for the Core 5 130HL, and 2.5 MB L2 per core versus 2 MB. The shared L3 is identical at 18 MB, meaning the Core Ultra 7 356H dedicates more on-die memory to each core while maintaining the same last-level capacity.

Memory controller differences reflect the platform split. The Core 5 130HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5, suggesting a transitional design compatible with older desktop platforms. The Core Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X only, with a recorded bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which is optimized for mobile power envelopes.

PCIe generation and lane count also differ: the Core 5 130HL offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 356H offers Gen 5 with 12 lanes. This gives the mobile part more and faster interconnect bandwidth for discrete components.

The integrated graphics solution differs in generation and branding. The Core 5 130HL uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, a Raptor Lake-era iGPU. The Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, the next-generation architecture, which is consistent with the Panther Lake design.

The production status for both is Active, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Core Ultra 7 356H has a known part number (SA4RGQ9EU), while the Core 5 130HL has an unknown part number in the database. The architecture differences, particularly the node shrink from 10 nm to 3 nm and the cache per-core increases, explain the Core Ultra 7 356H's measured performance advantage and its higher percentile ranking.