Intel Core 7 150UL vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H provides a full benchmark profile, while the Intel Core 7 150UL has no individual benchmark scores in the database. This makes a direct score-by-score comparison impossible. However, the available aggregate metrics and the Core Ultra 5 338H's individual results allow for a meaningful analysis of its performance positioning.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 33,989. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, which scores 34,083 and trails the 338H by only 0.3%. The Intel Core i7-12800HX scores 33,875, which is 0.3% behind the 338H. The AMD EPYC 4244P scores 34,220, putting it 0.7% ahead of the 338H. The Intel Xeon 6353P scores 33,844, falling 0.4% behind. These tight margins, all within 0.7% of the 338H's average score, indicate that the Core Ultra 5 338H delivers performance squarely in the range of these established desktop and mobile processors.

Looking at the Core Ultra 5 338H's individual benchmark results, its multi-threaded performance is particularly strong. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it records a score of 16,331, while its single-core score in the same test is 2,044. The Cinebench R20 results show 10,213 for multi-core and 1,441 for single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 2,504 for multi-core and 305 for single-core. These scores reveal a processor that scales well across threads, with the multi-core result in R23 being roughly eight times the single-core result, which is consistent with its 12-thread configuration.

The PassMark suite results for the Core Ultra 5 338H further detail its capabilities. The multi-thread score is 28,717, while the single-thread score is 4,180. In specific workloads, the processor achieves 84,067 in floating point math and 64,934 in integer math. Data compression scores 276,539, and data encryption scores 21,367. Extended instructions score 23,906, and finding prime numbers scores 304. Physics simulation scores 2,697, and random string sorting scores 34,082. The floating point and integer math scores indicate robust computational throughput, while the compression and encryption numbers show strong performance in data handling tasks.

The Intel Core 7 150UL, by contrast, has no benchmark scores recorded in the database and holds a 50th percentile ranking with an average benchmark score of zero. This absence of data means no head-to-head wins can be established for either processor from the benchmark results. The database does not contain any head-to-head benchmark entries for this pairing, and the wins counter shows zero for both parts. The analysis must therefore rely on the architectural and specification differences, along with the Core Ultra 5 338H's measured performance relative to its nearest rivals.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an average benchmark score of 33,989, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H scores 34,083. The 165H is 0.3% ahead of the 338H, a margin that falls within typical measurement variance.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating that it outperforms the majority of recorded processors.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 150UL have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the Intel Core 7 150UL has no individual benchmark scores recorded. Its average benchmark score is zero, and it holds a 50th percentile ranking.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL uses a 10 nm process node, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses a 3 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X memory. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from distinct architectural lineages. The Intel Core 7 150UL is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, and belongs to the Core 7 generation. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture, with the same Panther Lake codename, and belongs to the Ultra 5 generation within the Core Ultra Series 3. This architectural split reflects different design priorities and target platforms.

The process nodes differ substantially. The Core 7 150UL is manufactured on a 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 338H uses a 3 nm process. Both are produced by Intel's foundry. The smaller process node on the 338H allows for denser transistor packing and potentially improved power efficiency, though the database does not provide transistor counts or die sizes for either part.

Core and thread counts differ as well. The Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. The thread counts are identical, but the 338H has two additional physical cores. This means the 338H does not rely on simultaneous multithreading to reach its 12-thread count, whereas the 150UL uses two extra threads to supplement its 10 cores. The cache hierarchy also diverges. The 150UL has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The 338H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The 338H has larger caches at every level, which can reduce memory latency and improve throughput in cache-sensitive workloads.

The integrated graphics differ notably. The Core 7 150UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Core Ultra 5 338H uses Arc B370 graphics. The database does not provide execution unit counts for the Arc B370. The socket types also reflect different market targets: the 150UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the 338H uses Intel BGA 2540, a soldered mobile socket. The PCIe support differs, with the 150UL offering Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), and the 338H offering Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The 338H's newer PCIe generation provides higher potential bandwidth per lane, though the lane count is lower.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 1.70 GHz for the 150UL and 1.90 GHz for the 338H. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for the 150UL and 4.70 GHz for the 338H. The 150UL has a higher maximum boost clock by 0.30 GHz, while the 338H has a higher base clock by 0.20 GHz.

Thermal design power differs significantly. The Core 7 150UL has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 338H has a TDP of 25 watts. This 10-watt difference indicates that the 338H is designed for higher sustained performance at the cost of greater power draw, while the 150UL targets lower power operation. The sockets are incompatible: the 150UL uses Intel Socket 1700, and the 338H uses Intel BGA 2540. The memory support also differs, with the 150UL supporting DDR4 and DDR5, and the 338H supporting LPDDR5X only. The 338H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s, while the 150UL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database.

The process node is 10 nm for the 150UL and 3 nm for the 338H. The integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics 96EU for the 150UL and Arc B370 for the 338H. The market segments differ, with the 150UL listed as Desktop and the 338H listed as Mobile. The release dates differ as well: the 150UL was released on April 7, 2024, while the 338H was released on January 4, 2026. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database. Both processors have locked multipliers, and neither supports ECC memory. The 150UL has an unknown part number, while the 338H has the part number SA4REQ9EW.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a clear performance advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, but the absence of benchmark scores for the Intel Core 7 150UL requires the verdict to be drawn primarily from the 338H's measured results and the architectural specifications. The 338H records an average benchmark score of 33,989 and sits at the 84th percentile, while the 150UL has no recorded scores and sits at the 50th percentile. This difference in percentile ranking suggests that the 338H is positioned in the upper tier of processors in the database, while the 150UL is positioned at the median.

The 338H's nearest rivals, all within 0.7% of its average score, include the Core Ultra 7 165H, Core i7-12800HX, Xeon 6353P, and EPYC 4244P. This clustering indicates that the 338H delivers performance comparable to a range of higher-end desktop and mobile processors from both Intel and AMD. The 150UL, with no such rival data, cannot be placed in this context.

For users selecting between these two parts, the data points to the 338H as the stronger performer in multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. Its 12 physical cores, larger caches, newer process node, and higher TDP envelope all support this conclusion. The 150UL offers a lower TDP, a higher boost clock, and support for DDR4 memory, which may matter in specific system configurations. However, the recorded benchmark results for the 338H, combined with its superior core and cache specifications, indicate that it is the more capable processor for compute-intensive tasks. The 150UL's lack of benchmark data means its actual performance cannot be quantified from the database, so any assessment of its capabilities must rely solely on its specifications.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in multi-threaded performance based on its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16,331 and its PassMark multi-thread score of 28,717. Its 12 physical cores and 18 MB of L3 cache support heavy parallel workloads. The 338H also wins in single-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,044 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4,180. Its higher base clock of 1.90 GHz contributes to this result. The 338H additionally wins in memory bandwidth, with a recorded 136.5 GB/s, and in PCIe generation, offering Gen 5 support. Its 3 nm process node and larger per-core caches (192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2) provide architectural advantages.

The Intel Core 7 150UL wins in power efficiency, with a TDP of 15 watts compared to the 338H's 25 watts. This makes it suitable for low-power desktop builds. The 150UL also wins on maximum boost clock, reaching 5.00 GHz versus the 338H's 4.70 GHz, which can benefit lightly threaded workloads that favor high frequency. The 150UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering more flexibility in memory selection, while the 338H is limited to LPDDR5X. The 150UL uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, which is a standard desktop socket, whereas the 338H uses the BGA 2540 mobile socket, making it a soldered, non-upgradeable part.

The 338H's integrated graphics, Arc B370, represent a more recent graphics architecture than the 150UL's Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, though the database does not provide comparative graphics benchmark scores. The 338H's release date of January 4, 2026, is later than the 150UL's April 7, 2024, release date, indicating a newer product generation. For workloads involving data compression, the 338H scores 276,539 in PassMark, and for floating point math, it scores 84,067, both strong results. The 150UL has no equivalent scores in the database, so no direct comparison is possible for these specific tasks.