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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no direct comparative measurements between the Intel Core 7 150UL and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H. The Core 7 150UL has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Core Ultra 9 386H has a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results. This makes a symmetric comparison impossible, but the available data on the Core Ultra 9 386H can still be interpreted against its nearest rivals to establish its performance tier.

For the Core Ultra 9 386H, the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20547 places it in a strong position for heavy threaded workloads. The single-core score of 2071.5 in the same test indicates capable per-thread performance. In Cinebench R20, the multicore result of 12820 and single-core result of 1809 follow a similar pattern. The older Cinebench R15 test shows a multicore score of 3223 and a single-core score of 303.5.

PassMark results for the Core Ultra 9 386H cover a broad range of workloads. The multithread score of 35399 and single-thread score of 4218 show the processor handles both parallel and single-threaded tasks without a major weakness. Integer math scores 87284, while floating point math reaches 108527. Data compression scores 352365, and data encryption scores 27150. Extended instructions score 29138, and finding prime numbers scores 341. Physics processing scores 3028, and random string sorting scores 42135.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 9 386H is 43210, which places it at the 88th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 with an average score of 43326, which is 0.3% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 scores 43431, 0.5% higher. The Intel Core i9-12900 scores 42906, which is 0.7% lower than the Core Ultra 9 386H. The Intel Core i9-12900KF scores 42830, 0.9% lower. These deltas are all within roughly one percentage point, meaning the Core Ultra 9 386H sits in a tightly contested performance band.

Since the Core 7 150UL has no benchmark entries in the database, its performance cannot be quantified here. The data shows a complete absence of scores for that processor, which prevents any head-to-head comparison. The only meaningful interpretation is that the Core Ultra 9 386H delivers performance near the top of its immediate competitor group, while the Core 7 150UL remains unmeasured.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Intel Core 7 150UL uses Raptor Lake, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, and belongs to the Core 7 generation. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses Panther Lake, specifically Panther Lake-H, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation. These are distinct design lineages with different manufacturing processes.

The Core 7 150UL is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry. The Core Ultra 9 386H uses a 3 nm process node, also from Intel's foundry. The smaller process node for the Core Ultra 9 386H allows for denser transistor packing, though the database does not list transistor counts or die sizes for either part.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, meaning it uses a hybrid arrangement where some cores do not have hyperthreading. The Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads, so every core appears to handle one thread each. The Core Ultra 9 386H has six more physical cores and four more threads.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 150UL has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 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 Core Ultra 9 386H has more L1 and L2 per core and 6 MB more L3 cache.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 7 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with a dual-channel memory bus. The Core Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, also with a dual-channel bus. The Core Ultra 9 386H has a listed memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the Core 7 150UL has no bandwidth figure in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core 7 150UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 9 386H provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 9 386H offers a newer PCIe generation and more lanes.

Integrated graphics also change between the two. The Core 7 150UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Core Ultra 9 386H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, though the database does not list an execution unit count.

The market segments differ. The Core 7 150UL is listed as a desktop processor with an Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 9 386H is a mobile processor with an Intel BGA 2540 socket. The Core 7 150UL has a 15 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 9 386H has a 25 W TDP. Both are active production parts.

Release timing also differs. The Core 7 150UL has a release date of 2024-04-07, while the Core Ultra 9 386H has a release date of 2026-01-04. Neither processor has a launch MSRP listed in the database. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Core Ultra 9 386H has six more physical cores and four more threads.

Q: What is the performance percentile of the Core Ultra 9 386H?

A: The Core Ultra 9 386H is at the 88th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 43210.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 386H compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average score of 43326, which is 0.3% higher than the Core Ultra 9 386H. The difference is minimal.

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

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the Intel Core 7 150UL, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its percentile versus all CPUs is 50, but this is based on no recorded measurements.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 7 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The Core Ultra 9 386H has a listed memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

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

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 10 for the Core 7 150UL, 16 for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Threads: 12 for the Core 7 150UL, 16 for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Base clock: 1.70 GHz for the Core 7 150UL, 2.10 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Boost clock: 5.00 GHz for the Core 7 150UL, 4.90 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• TDP: 15 W for the Core 7 150UL, 25 W for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 7 150UL, Intel BGA 2540 for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Architecture: Raptor Lake for the Core 7 150UL, Panther Lake for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Codename: Raptor Lake-PS for the Core 7 150UL, Panther Lake for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Process node: 10 nm for the Core 7 150UL, 3 nm for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core for the Core 7 150UL, 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core for the Core 7 150UL, 2.5 MB per core for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• L3 cache: 12 MB shared for the Core 7 150UL, 18 MB shared for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Memory support: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 7 150UL, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Memory bandwidth: not listed for the Core 7 150UL, 115.2 GB/s for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• PCIe: Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the Core 7 150UL, Gen 5 with 12 lanes for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Integrated graphics: Iris Xe Graphics 96EU for the Core 7 150UL, Intel Xe3 Graphics for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Market segment: Desktop for the Core 7 150UL, Mobile for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Release date: 2024-04-07 for the Core 7 150UL, 2026-01-04 for the Core Ultra 9 386H
• Part number: unknown for the Core 7 150UL, SA4R5Q9EH for the Core Ultra 9 386H

The Verdict

The database holds no benchmark results for the Intel Core 7 150UL, so any direct verdict on its performance is unsupported by measurements. The Core Ultra 9 386H, by contrast, has a complete benchmark profile that places it at the 88th percentile among all CPUs. Its average score of 43210 sits within one percentage point of four nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43326 and the Intel Core i9-12900 at 42906.

The Core 7 150UL offers a lower TDP of 15 W compared to 25 W for the Core Ultra 9 386H, which suggests lower power draw for lighter workloads. It also has a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.90 GHz, which could benefit lightly threaded tasks if measured, but no data confirms this. The Core Ultra 9 386H has more cores, more cache at every level, a smaller process node, newer PCIe generation, and a higher base clock.

For builders choosing between these two, the data only supports one side. The Core Ultra 9 386H has recorded performance numbers that show strong multi-core and single-thread capability. The Core 7 150UL has no recorded performance numbers, making it an unverified option. The Core Ultra 9 386H is the only one of the two with measurable results in the database, and those results indicate a high-performing mobile processor.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 386H wins in every category where the database provides measurable evidence. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20547 and PassMark multithread score of 35399 show strong parallel processing. Its single-core scores of 2071.5 in Cinebench R23 and 4218 in PassMark indicate it also handles per-thread workloads effectively. The 88th percentile ranking and the average score of 43210 put it in a competitive tier with the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and Intel Core i9-12900 series.

The Core 7 150UL has no benchmark wins because no benchmark data exists. Its specification advantages are limited to a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz and a lower TDP of 15 W. These attributes could theoretically favor power-sensitive desktop builds or lightly threaded applications, but the database contains no measurements to confirm such an advantage.

For users prioritizing measured performance, the Core Ultra 9 386H is the clear choice. For users who need a lower-power desktop part with a 5.00 GHz boost clock and support for DDR4 memory, the Core 7 150UL offers those specific specifications, but without any recorded performance validation. The data does not support any claim of superiority for the Core 7 150UL in any benchmark category.