Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different architectural families within Intel's current mobile lineup. The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's foundry. The chip has 6 cores and 6 threads, with a 192 KB L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. Its integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses the Panther Lake codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, specifically the Panther Lake-H variant. It also uses a 3 nm process node from Intel. The chip is substantially larger in core count, featuring 16 cores and 16 threads. Its cache hierarchy is notably deeper: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The integrated graphics are Arc B390.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The Core 5 330 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a single-channel interface, yielding 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core Ultra X7 358H supports only LPDDR5X but uses a dual-channel interface, delivering 153.6 GB/s, more than 2.5 times the bandwidth. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also separates the two. The Core 5 330 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra X7 358H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU. Both are mobile market segments with production status marked as active. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: 6 cores and 6 threads versus 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core Ultra X7 358H has more than double the core count, and it maintains a 1:1 thread-to-core ratio just like the smaller chip.

Clock speeds differ modestly. The Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra X7 358H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The larger chip runs 0.40 GHz faster at base and 0.20 GHz faster at boost.

Thermal design power differs by 10 watts: 15 W for the Core 5 330 versus 25 W for the Core Ultra X7 358H. Socket types differ as well: Intel BGA 1516 for the smaller chip, Intel BGA 2540 for the larger one.

Cache capacities are starkly different. The Core 5 330 has 2.5 MB of L2 total, while the Core Ultra X7 358H has 3 MB per core, which scales to 48 MB across 16 cores. L3 cache is 6 MB shared versus 18 MB shared. L1 cache is 192 KB total versus 192 KB per core.

Memory bus width and supported memory types differ as described above. The Core 5 330 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core Ultra X7 358H supports only LPDDR5X. PCIe generation and lane counts differ: Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes.

Release dates differ by roughly three months. The Core Ultra X7 358H launched on 2026-01-04, and the Core 5 330 launched on 2026-04-15. The Core 5 330 has a launch MSRP of $309; the Core Ultra X7 358H has no launch MSRP recorded. Part numbers are SAE3G for the Core 5 330 and SA4RAQ9ET for the Core Ultra X7 358H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The Core Ultra X7 358H has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB total L1, 2.5 MB total L2, and 6 MB shared L3.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The Core 5 330 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel interface. The Core Ultra X7 358H supports only LPDDR5X but uses dual-channel, giving it 153.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Which chip has higher clock speeds?

A: The Core Ultra X7 358H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 5 330 has a base of 1.50 GHz and a boost of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core 5 330 has a TDP of 15 W. The Core Ultra X7 358H has a TDP of 25 W, a 10 W difference.

Q: Which processor has the higher benchmark percentile?

A: The Core Ultra X7 358H sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 330 sits at the 72nd percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a comprehensive sweep. The Core Ultra X7 358H wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with zero wins for the Core 5 330. The margin varies from narrow to overwhelming.

The largest single-core gap appears in Cinebench R15 single-core. The Core Ultra X7 358H scores 301.5 while the Core 5 330 scores 186, a 38.3% difference. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 54% gap: 1695 versus 779. Cinebench R23 single-core narrows that gap to 10.8%: 2080 versus 1856. PassMark single-thread results show only a 0.9% difference: 4124 versus 4088.

Multi-core results show wider margins. Cinebench R15 multi-core has the Core Ultra X7 358H at 3027 versus 1325, a 56.2% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 12011 versus 5523, a 54% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 18747 versus 13150, a 29.9% gap. The R23 gap is the smallest multi-core margin, indicating the Core 5 330 scales better in the longer workload relative to its own performance.

PassMark tests show consistent leads for the larger chip. Integer math: 83147 versus 33258, a 60% gap. Floating point math: 103842 versus 43885, a 57.7% gap. Physics: 3021 versus 1201, a 60.2% gap. Data encryption: 26046 versus 11076, a 57.5% gap. Data compression: 332508 versus 145287, a 56.3% gap. Extended instructions: 27274 versus 12808, a 53% gap. Prime number finding: 337 versus 114, the largest margin at 66.2%. Random string sorting: 40357 versus 17771, a 56% gap. PassMark multithread: 33802 versus 15471, a 54.2% gap.

The average benchmark scores reflect the overall hierarchy. The Core Ultra X7 358H averages 40967, while the Core 5 330 averages 18345. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 330 include the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.1% delta), the Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 (-0.2%), and the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (-0.2%). The Core Ultra X7 358H sits near the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41208 (-0.6%), the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41215 (-0.6%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G at 40718 (0.6%).

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra X7 358H is faster in every recorded benchmark, with advantages ranging from 0.9% in single-thread tests to 66.2% in prime number finding. The 16-core chip with 18 MB of L3 and dual-channel memory delivers a 123% higher average benchmark score than the 6-core chip.

The Core 5 330 is a lower-power part at 15 W TDP versus 25 W, and it supports DDR5 memory in addition to LPDDR5X. It also has a recorded launch MSRP of $309. The Core Ultra X7 358H has no launch MSRP recorded.

For users choosing between these two, the decision depends on workload. Single-thread performance is nearly identical, with only a 0.9% difference in PassMark single-thread scores. The Core 5 330 will not feel meaningfully slower in lightly threaded tasks. Multi-threaded workloads, however, show a massive gap: the Core Ultra X7 358H leads by 29.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core and by 54.2% in PassMark multithread.

The core count difference of 10 cores explains most of the multi-core gap. The dual-channel memory interface with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth versus 59.7 GB/s also contributes, particularly in memory-sensitive workloads like compression and encryption.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra X7 358H wins in every measured category, but the margins tell a more nuanced story. Its largest wins are in compute-heavy workloads: prime number finding at 66.2% ahead, integer math at 60%, and physics at 60.2%. These tasks scale directly with core count and memory bandwidth.

The Core 5 330's closest relative performance is in single-threaded tests. PassMark single-thread shows only a 0.9% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 10.8% gap. This suggests the Core 5 330's smaller core count does not penalize it in lightly threaded scenarios, and its 4.60 GHz boost clock keeps it within striking distance of the 4.80 GHz boost on the larger chip.

For memory bandwidth-sensitive tasks like data compression and encryption, the Core Ultra X7 358H leads by 56.3% and 57.5% respectively. The dual-channel LPDDR5X interface at 153.6 GB/s versus single-channel at 59.7 GB/s provides a structural advantage that core count alone cannot explain.

The Core 5 330's advantages are not performance-related. It has a lower TDP of 15 W versus 25 W, making it suitable for thinner, cooler-running systems. It supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, offering more memory flexibility. It also has a recorded launch MSRP of $309, which provides a reference point for system builders.

The data does not show any benchmark where the Core 5 330 wins. Users who prioritize multi-threaded performance, memory bandwidth, or any measured compute workload should select the Core Ultra X7 358H. Users who prioritize lower power consumption or memory type flexibility may consider the Core 5 330, but they should expect significantly lower multi-core throughput.