Intel Core 7 150U vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records 17 head-to-head comparisons between the Intel Core 7 150U and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, and the Ultra 9 386H wins every single one of them. The largest margin appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 9 386H scores 341 against the Core 7 150U's 58, a delta of 83% in favor of the Ultra part. That is the most lopsided result in the entire set, indicating a massive advantage in certain integer-heavy workloads.

The Cinebench multi-core results also show a substantial gap. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Ultra 9 386H scores 12820 versus 5248 for the Core 7 150U, a 59.1% difference. The R23 multi-core test shows the Ultra 9 386H at 20547 against 8883, a 56.8% edge. The R15 multi-core test shows a 53.3% delta with scores of 3223 and 1505.5 respectively. These are not marginal wins; the Ultra 9 386H roughly doubles the Core 7 150U's multi-threaded rendering output in every Cinebench version recorded.

Single-core results are closer but still favor the Ultra 9 386H. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 9 386H scores 2071.5 versus 1875.5 for the Core 7 150U, a 9.5% delta. The R15 single-core test shows a 16.3% delta (303.5 vs 254), and the R20 single-core test shows a 59.1% delta (1809 vs 740). The R20 single-core margin is unusually large compared to the other single-core results, suggesting a particularly strong response in that specific workload.

The PassMark suite reveals consistent dominance across diverse workloads. Data compression scores 352365 for the Ultra 9 386H versus 158622 for the Core 7 150U, a 55% delta. Data encryption shows a 63.1% delta (27150 vs 10025). Extended instructions show a 70% delta (29138 vs 8748). Floating point math shows a 68.3% delta (108527 vs 34405). Integer math shows a 41.5% delta (87284 vs 51057). Multithreaded performance shows a 58.5% delta (35399 vs 14700). Physics shows a 66.6% delta (3028 vs 1012). Random string sorting shows a 56.6% delta (42135 vs 18269). Single-thread performance shows a 16.8% delta (4218 vs 3508).

The smallest deltas are in single-threaded workloads, which is expected given that both processors have high boost clocks. The Core 7 150U boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Ultra 9 386H boosts to 4.90 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock, the Ultra 9 386H still wins single-threaded tests by measurable margins, indicating architectural efficiency outweighs the raw clock advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 150U does not win a single recorded benchmark in this comparison. The data shows zero wins for the Core 7 150U and 17 wins for the Ultra 9 386H. That means every workload category in the database, from single-threaded tasks to heavily parallel workloads, favors the Ultra 9 386H.

The Core 7 150U's closest relative performance appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it trails by only 9.5%. This suggests that in short, lightly threaded bursts, the Core 7 150U can approach the Ultra 9 386H's per-core output. However, even that narrow margin is a loss.

The Ultra 9 386H's biggest advantages appear in tasks that scale with core count and memory bandwidth. The find prime numbers test, which is highly sensitive to integer throughput and core scaling, shows an 83% delta. Extended instructions and floating point math show deltas above 68%, indicating strong SIMD and vector processing capabilities. The data encryption test shows a 63.1% delta, suggesting the Ultra 9 386H handles cryptographic workloads with significantly more throughput.

For users running multi-threaded rendering, scientific computing, or data compression, the Ultra 9 386H is the clear choice based on the recorded scores. For users running light productivity or single-threaded applications, the Core 7 150U is still slower, but the gap narrows to single-digit or low-double-digit percentages in some tests like Cinebench R23 single-core.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architecture families and process nodes. The Core 7 150U uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the Ultra 9 386H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm node. The process node difference is significant: the 3 nm node allows for tighter transistor packing and potentially lower power draw per transistor, though the database does not record specific transistor counts or die sizes.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 7 150U uses hyper-threading (12 threads from 10 cores), while the Ultra 9 386H does not (16 threads from 16 cores). Despite having no hyper-threading, the Ultra 9 386H's additional six physical cores give it a raw parallel advantage that shows clearly in multi-core benchmarks.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 150U has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 386H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core caches and the 50% larger L3 pool contribute to the Ultra 9 386H's advantage in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support differs. The Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core 7 150U's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database, but the Ultra 9 386H's higher bandwidth specification aligns with its stronger performance in memory-intensive tests.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core 7 150U uses Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 9 386H uses Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. This affects peripheral bandwidth for GPUs and NVMe storage.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 7 150U uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units (96 EU). The Ultra 9 386H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not record execution unit counts for the Xe3, so a direct comparison of graphics compute is not possible from the data.

Base and boost clocks differ. The Core 7 150U has a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Ultra 9 386H has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Core 7 150U has the higher boost clock, but the Ultra 9 386H has the higher base clock.

The TDP ratings differ: 15 watts for the Core 7 150U versus 25 watts for the Ultra 9 386H. The Ultra 9 386H draws more power, which correlates with its higher performance, though the database does not record power draw under load.

Sockets differ. The Core 7 150U uses Intel BGA 1744, while the Ultra 9 386H uses Intel BGA 2540. These are not interchangeable sockets.

Release dates differ. The Core 7 150U was released in January 2024, while the Ultra 9 386H was released in January 2026. The two-year gap reflects the architecture generation difference.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H outperforms the Intel Core 7 150U in every recorded benchmark. The average benchmark score for the Ultra 9 386H is 43210, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 150U has an average benchmark score of 17395, placing it in the 71st percentile. That is a massive gulf in absolute terms.

The nearest rivals in the database put these scores in context. The Core 7 150U's average score of 17395 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 4500 (17333, delta 0.4%) and the AMD Ryzen 3 210 (17321, delta 0.4%). It is also close to the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE (17482, delta -0.5%) and the AMD Ryzen 5 4600G (17507, delta -0.6%). The Core 7 150U slots into a mid-range cluster of desktop and mobile processors.

The Ultra 9 386H's average score of 43210 places it alongside the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (43326, delta -0.3%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (43431, delta -0.5%). It also edges out the Intel Core i9-12900 (42906, delta 0.7%) and the Intel Core i9-12900KF (42830, delta 0.9%). The Ultra 9 386H competes with high-end desktop-class processors despite being a mobile part.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Ultra 9 386H is the only rational choice from this data. It delivers roughly double the Cinebench multi-core scores and nearly two and a half times the PassMark multithread score. The 16 physical cores and larger cache hierarchy provide a decisive advantage in rendering, compression, encryption, and physics simulations.

For single-threaded workloads, the Ultra 9 386H still wins, but the margin shrinks. Single-core deltas range from 9.5% to 16.8% in Cinebench and PassMark. The Core 7 150U's higher boost clock (5.40 GHz vs 4.90 GHz) narrows the gap but cannot overcome the architectural efficiency of the Panther Lake design.

The Ultra 9 386H also offers superior platform features: PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, higher memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s), and a newer integrated graphics engine (Intel Xe3). The Core 7 150U offers DDR4 support, which may be an advantage for platforms with older memory, but the database does not record any benchmark that specifically tests memory compatibility.

The Core 7 150U's lower TDP (15 watts vs 25 watts) may suit fanless or passively cooled designs, but the database does not record thermal or power efficiency benchmarks. For performance, the Ultra 9 386H wins outright.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core 7 150U has 10 cores.

Q: What is the difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core scores?

A: The Ultra 9 386H scores 20547 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core 7 150U scores 8883. The delta is 56.8% in favor of the Ultra 9 386H.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 150U has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, which is higher than the Ultra 9 386H's boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the Core 7 150U and the Ultra 9 386H have ECC memory support set to false in the database.

Q: What process nodes do the two processors use?

A: The Core 7 150U uses a 10 nm process node, while the Ultra 9 386H uses a 3 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ultra 9 386H has an average benchmark score of 43210, which places it in the 88th percentile. The Core 7 150U has an average benchmark score of 17395, placing it in the 71st percentile.