Intel Core 7 150HL vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for the Intel Core 7 150HL and the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL has a base clock of 2.40 GHz, which is higher than the 2.00 GHz base clock of the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H. Both processors share the same 5.00 GHz boost clock.

Q: What process node does each processor use?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL uses Intel's 10 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H uses Intel's 3 nm process.

Q: What type of memory does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H supports LPDDR5X memory. The Ultra X9 also has a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H sits at the 89th percentile, while the Intel Core 7 150HL sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor include?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL features Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H features Arc B390 graphics.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different Intel design generations and target different market segments. The Intel Core 7 150HL is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, and uses a 10 nm process node from Intel. It is classified as a desktop processor and uses the Intel Socket 1700. Its cache hierarchy is organized with 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 150HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel memory bus, and its PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 8 lanes available from the CPU.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 and uses the Panther Lake codename, specifically Panther Lake-H. It is built on Intel's 3 nm process node and is classified as a mobile processor, using the Intel BGA 2540 socket. Its cache structure is larger per core: 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache is smaller at 18 MB. The Ultra X9 supports only LPDDR5X memory through a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. Its PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU.

The architectural split is clear: the Core 7 150HL is a desktop part with a larger shared L3 pool, while the Ultra X9 378H is a mobile part with a smaller process node, faster memory bandwidth, and a newer PCIe generation. The Ultra X9 also uses a newer process node (3 nm versus 10 nm), which typically improves power efficiency and density. Both processors lack ECC memory support and both have locked multipliers, so neither is intended for overclocking.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 150HL wins on thread count. With 20 threads versus 16, it offers more concurrent execution contexts, which can benefit heavily threaded workloads that scale with thread availability rather than raw core count. Its larger shared L3 cache (24 MB versus 18 MB) may also help in scenarios where repeated data access benefits from a bigger cache pool.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins on core count, process node, memory bandwidth, and integrated graphics. Its 16 cores exceed the 14 cores of the Core 7 150HL, and its 3 nm process node is substantially more advanced than the 10 nm node of the older part. The 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is a recorded advantage for memory-intensive tasks, and the Arc B390 integrated graphics is a newer generation compared to Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The Ultra X9 also uses PCIe Gen 5, which doubles the transfer rate per lane compared to the Gen 4 interface of the Core 7 150HL.

The benchmark data available only covers the Ultra X9 378H, which has recorded scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests. The Core 7 150HL has no benchmark entries in the database, so the wins for the Ultra X9 are measured directly, while the Core 7's advantages are structural based on specifications.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification category except boost clock and ECC support.

• Cores: 14 (Core 7 150HL) versus 16 (Ultra X9 378H)
• Threads: 20 (Core 7 150HL) versus 16 (Ultra X9 378H)
• Base clock: 2.40 GHz (Core 7 150HL) versus 2.00 GHz (Ultra X9 378H)
• Boost clock: 5.00 GHz for both
• TDP: 45 W (Core 7 150HL) versus 25 W (Ultra X9 378H)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 7 150HL) versus Intel BGA 2540 (Ultra X9 378H)
• Process node: 10 nm (Core 7 150HL) versus 3 nm (Ultra X9 378H)
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core (Core 7 150HL) versus 192 KB per core (Ultra X9 378H)
• L2 cache: 2 MB per core (Core 7 150HL) versus 2.5 MB per core (Ultra X9 378H)
• L3 cache: 24 MB shared (Core 7 150HL) versus 18 MB shared (Ultra X9 378H)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 7 150HL) versus LPDDR5X (Ultra X9 378H)
• Memory bandwidth: not recorded (Core 7 150HL) versus 153.6 GB/s (Ultra X9 378H)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 8 lanes (Core 7 150HL) versus Gen 5, 4 lanes (Ultra X9 378H)
• Integrated graphics: Iris Xe Graphics 96EU (Core 7 150HL) versus Arc B390 (Ultra X9 378H)
• Market segment: Desktop (Core 7 150HL) versus Mobile (Ultra X9 378H)
• Release date: 2024-04-07 (Core 7 150HL) versus 2026-04-03 (Ultra X9 378H)

The TDP difference is substantial: the Core 7 150HL draws 45 W, while the Ultra X9 378H draws only 25 W. The Ultra X9 also uses a newer generation designation, being part of the Ultra X9 series under Panther Lake-H, while the Core 7 150HL is under the Core 7 generation with Raptor Lake-PS.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark scores only for the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H. The Intel Core 7 150HL has no recorded benchmark results, so the head-to-head comparison is based entirely on the Ultra X9's measured performance and its position relative to other CPUs.

The Ultra X9 378H records a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 3281 and a single-core score of 462. In Cinebench R20, it scores 13672 multicore and 1929 single-core. The Cinebench R23 results show 32553 multicore and 4595 single-core. These scores demonstrate strong scaling from R15 through R23, with the multicore scores increasing substantially across versions.

In Passmark tests, the Ultra X9 378H shows a broad range of performance. Its multithread score is 38298, while single-thread performance is 4453. The data compression score is 386591, and data encryption reaches 29840. Extended instructions score 31315, and finding prime numbers produces a score of 357. Floating point math scores 114500, while integer math scores 92603. Physics testing yields 3404, and random string sorting produces 44648.

The average benchmark score for the Ultra X9 378H is 47468, placing it at the 89th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, which scores 47527 and is 0.1% faster, and the Intel Core i7-13700KF, which scores 47330 and is 0.3% slower. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T scores 47697 and is 0.5% faster, while the Intel Core i9-12900F scores 47176 and is 0.6% slower. These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the Ultra X9 378H performs essentially at the same level as these established desktop CPUs.

Since the Core 7 150HL has no benchmark data, the measured wins belong entirely to the Ultra X9 378H. The comparison between the two is therefore a comparison between a measured high-percentile performer and a processor with no recorded performance data.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is the clearly measured performer. Its benchmark scores place it at the 89th percentile, and its average score of 47468 puts it within 0.6% of processors like the Intel Core i9-12900F and the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945. The data shows it delivers strong multicore and single-core results across Cinebench and Passmark tests, with a multithread score of 38298 and a single-thread score of 4453. Its 3 nm process node, 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and Arc B390 graphics make it a modern mobile part with competitive performance.

The Intel Core 7 150HL offers a different structural profile. Its 20 threads exceed the Ultra X9's 16 threads, which can help in software that uses more threads than cores. Its 24 MB shared L3 cache is larger, and its 45 W TDP suggests it can sustain higher power draw for desktop use. However, without any benchmark scores in the database, there is no measured evidence of its performance relative to the Ultra X9 or to any other CPU.

For a builder choosing between these two, the data supports the Ultra X9 378H for anyone who needs proven performance in a mobile form factor with lower power consumption. The Core 7 150HL is a desktop socket part with more threads and a bigger L3 cache, but its performance is unverified in the database. The Ultra X9's recorded results, including its 32553 Cinebench R23 multicore score and 4595 single-core score, give it a measurable edge that the Core 7 150HL cannot counter with recorded data.