Intel Core 7 150HL vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Intel Core 7 150HL and Intel Core Ultra 9 285 occupy different tiers in the database, with the Ultra 9 285 recording an average benchmark score of 75,488 against the Core 7 150HL’s 0 (no benchmark entries are recorded for the latter). The Core Ultra 9 285 sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 150HL sits at the 50th percentile. This gap in recorded data shapes the entire comparison: the Core 7 150HL has no benchmark results, so all quantitative analysis must rely on the Core Ultra 9 285’s recorded scores and its rival comparisons.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Core 7 150HL and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. The Core 7 150HL has an empty benchmarks array, meaning no Cinebench, PassMark, or other test scores are available for analysis. Consequently, no exact score comparisons can be drawn between the two processors.

For the Core Ultra 9 285, the recorded data provides a full picture of its performance. In Cinebench R23, it scores 48,945 in multicore and 6,909 in single-core. Cinebench R20 shows 20,556 multicore and 2,901 single-core. Cinebench R15 records 4,933 multicore and 696 single-core. PassMark results include a multithread score of 56,602, a single-thread score of 4,881, integer math at 164,869, floating point math at 194,988, and extended instructions at 45,357. Data compression reaches 602,121, data encryption 46,949, random string sorting 73,651, physics 3,598, and prime number finding 459.

Since the Core 7 150HL lacks any benchmark entries, the head-to-head section must rely on architectural and specification comparisons rather than measured scores. The Core Ultra 9 285’s nearest rivals in the database are AMD EPYC 8224P with an average score of 75,582 and a delta of -0.1%, AMD EPYC 4545P with 75,373 and a delta of 0.2%, AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D with 75,716 and a delta of -0.3%, and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 with 75,738 and a delta of -0.3%. These deltas show the Core Ultra 9 285 is effectively tied with those server and workstation parts, sitting within 0.3% of each.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 285 wins every category where data exists. Its multicore Cinebench R23 score of 48,945 and PassMark multithread score of 56,602 indicate strong parallel throughput. Its single-core Cinebench R23 score of 6,909 and PassMark single-thread score of 4,881 show robust lightly threaded performance. The Core 7 150HL has no recorded wins because no benchmark data exists for it.

The Core 7 150HL does hold advantages in certain specification areas. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 9 285 supports only DDR5. The Core 7 150HL uses Intel Socket 1700, a platform shared with many existing Intel desktop boards, whereas the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 7 150HL’s integrated graphics, Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, carries 96 execution units, while the Core Ultra 9 285’s Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU carries 64 execution units. These are not performance wins but platform and feature differences.

The Core Ultra 9 285 also has a higher boost clock at 5.60 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, and a higher base clock at 2.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz. It supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the Core 7 150HL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures. The Core 7 150HL uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry. The Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arrow Lake, specifically Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the Core 7 150HL has no transistor or die size data recorded.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 7 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 9 285 has no hyperthreading, as its thread count equals its core count, while the Core 7 150HL has 20 threads from 14 cores, indicating simultaneous multithreading.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 150HL has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 285 therefore has larger per-core caches and a larger shared L3.

Memory support differs. The Core 7 150HL accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 285 accepts DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Core Ultra 9 285 records a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; the Core 7 150HL has no memory bandwidth figure. The Core Ultra 9 285 supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 150HL does not.

PCIe support differs by a generation and lane count. The Core 7 150HL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 9 285 provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 9 285’s platform is newer, with a 2024-12-31 release date versus the Core 7 150HL’s 2024-04-07 release date.

The integrated graphics differ in execution unit count and architecture. The Core 7 150HL uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core Ultra 9 285’s integrated GPU is from a newer graphics architecture but has fewer execution units.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy: the Core Ultra 9 285 delivers measured multicore and single-core results, while the Core 7 150HL has no benchmark scores in the database. The Core Ultra 9 285’s 95th percentile ranking, average score of 75,488, and its position within 0.3% of several AMD EPYC and Ryzen PRO parts indicate it belongs in a high-end performance class. The Core 7 150HL’s 50th percentile ranking with no recorded scores places it in a middle tier without measurable performance evidence.

For users choosing between these two, the data supports the Core Ultra 9 285 for any workload that benefits from measured multicore throughput, given its 24 cores, 24 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 48,945. The Core 7 150HL may appeal to users needing DDR4 compatibility, a familiar LGA 1700 socket, or a higher execution unit count in integrated graphics, but no benchmark data confirms its performance level. The Core Ultra 9 285 also offers ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, and a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz, all recorded in the database.

The Core 7 150HL is not a direct competitor on measured performance. It has fewer cores, fewer threads, a smaller L3 cache, an older architecture node, and no benchmark entries. The Core Ultra 9 285 is the only processor in this comparison with recorded performance data, and that data consistently shows strong results across Cinebench and PassMark tests.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 have a higher benchmark score than the Intel Core 7 150HL?

A: Yes. The Core Ultra 9 285 has an average benchmark score of 75,488 and sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 7 150HL has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 7 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What is the maximum boost clock for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz. The Intel Core 7 150HL boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 150HL does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 supports only DDR5.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285’s nearest rivals are AMD EPYC 8224P with a delta of -0.1%, AMD EPYC 4545P with a delta of 0.2%, AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D with a delta of -0.3%, and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 with a delta of -0.3%. All deltas are within 0.3%, indicating near-parity with those processors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 150HL | Intel Core Ultra 9 285 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 14 | 24 |

| Threads | 20 | 24 |

| Base clock | 2.40 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 cache | 24 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

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

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | No |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2024-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $579 |

| Part number | Unknown | SRQD4 |