Intel Core 7 150UL vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

Intel Core 7 150UL vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H

The Intel Core 7 150UL and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H occupy different corners of the processor market, with the former built for efficient desktop operation and the latter designed for high-performance mobile computing. The recorded benchmark data shows a clear overall winner in the Core Ultra X7 358H, which ranks in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 150UL sits at the 50th percentile. The Core Ultra X7 358H delivers substantially higher scores across every recorded test, making it the superior choice for demanding workloads, while the Core 7 150UL offers a lower-power alternative with a higher boost clock and a desktop socket.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split between these two processors is stark, as the Core Ultra X7 358H wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. The 358H dominates in multi-threaded workloads, with its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18747 representing a massive advantage over the Core 7 150UL, which has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This makes the 358H the clear pick for rendering, video encoding, scientific computing, and any application that scales across multiple cores.

The Core 7 150UL, despite lacking recorded benchmark scores, still has a place in the market based on its specifications. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock is higher than the 358H's 4.80 GHz, which could translate to competitive single-thread performance in lightly threaded applications. The 150UL also uses the Intel Socket 1700, making it a drop-in option for existing desktop motherboards, whereas the 358H uses the BGA 2540 socket, which is soldered to the motherboard. The 150UL's 15 W TDP makes it suitable for compact desktop builds where power consumption and heat generation are primary concerns.

For users who need maximum performance in a mobile form factor, the 358H is the only logical choice. Its 16 cores and 16 threads provide double the core count of the 150UL, and its 3 nm process node represents a significant generational leap over the 150UL's 10 nm process. The 358H also supports faster memory with LPDDR5X and a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s, which feeds its high-core-count architecture more effectively.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, reflecting different design philosophies and target markets. The Core 7 150UL is based on Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, a desktop-oriented design built on Intel's 10 nm process. It features 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement of performance and efficiency cores. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Core Ultra X7 358H uses the Panther Lake codename from the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, built on Intel's 3 nm process. This newer process node allows for greater transistor density and improved power efficiency per operation. The 358H doubles the core count to 16 cores with 16 threads, and its cache hierarchy is significantly larger: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core caches and higher total L3 capacity give the 358H a substantial advantage in workloads that benefit from data locality.

The memory support differs fundamentally. The 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing flexibility for desktop builders with existing memory. The 358H supports only LPDDR5X, which is optimized for mobile platforms and delivers higher bandwidth at lower power consumption. The recorded memory bandwidth for the 358H is 153.6 GB/s, a figure not available for the 150UL in the database.

PCIe capabilities also diverge. The 150UL offers PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 358H provides PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The newer Gen 5 standard on the 358H offers double the bandwidth per lane, which can benefit high-speed storage and future expansion cards, though the 150UL's higher lane count may be preferable for multi-device desktop setups.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The 150UL pairs with Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, a capable solution for desktop tasks and light media work. The 358H integrates Arc B390 graphics, which represents Intel's higher-performance graphics architecture and is better suited for gaming and GPU-accelerated workloads on a mobile platform.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors, but the Core Ultra X7 358H has a full suite of recorded scores. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18747 places the 358H well above the average processor, and its single-core score of 2080 indicates strong per-thread performance. In Cinebench R20, the 358H scores 12011 multicore and 1695 single-core, while the older Cinebench R15 test yields 3027 multicore and 301.5 single-core.

PassMark results for the 358H show consistent strength across varied workloads. The multithread score of 33802 and single-thread score of 4124 demonstrate balanced performance. Integer math scores 83147, floating point math reaches 103842, and extended instructions (SIMD) score 27274. Data compression hits 332508, while data encryption scores 26046. Random string sorting achieves 40357, and the find prime numbers test records 337. Physics processing scores 3021.

The 358H's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with an average score of 41208 and a delta of -0.6%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H with 41215 and -0.6%, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G with 40718 and +0.6%, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with 41263 and -0.7%. These small deltas indicate the 358H performs competitively within its immediate peer group, with the average benchmark score of 40967 placing it just below the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 and Core Ultra 7 356H, and above the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G.

The Core 7 150UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, making direct numerical comparisons impossible. However, its lower core count, smaller cache, and older process node strongly suggest it would score significantly lower in multi-threaded tests. Its higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz could narrow the gap in single-threaded workloads, but the 358H's 4.80 GHz boost is only 0.20 GHz lower, a margin that the 358H's architectural advantages likely overcome.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is the superior processor for nearly all computing tasks. Its 16 cores, larger caches, newer 3 nm process, and higher memory bandwidth position it as a high-performance mobile processor, confirmed by its 87th percentile ranking and comprehensive benchmark scores. Users who run multi-threaded applications, creative workloads, or any CPU-intensive tasks should choose the 358H.

The Intel Core 7 150UL serves a specific niche as a low-power desktop processor. Its 15 W TDP, Socket 1700 compatibility, and 5.00 GHz boost clock make it suitable for compact desktop builds, home servers, or systems where power efficiency and easy upgradeability matter more than raw performance. The 150UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility for builders with existing components.

The 358H's 25 W TDP is higher than the 150UL's 15 W, but this is expected given its greater core count and performance level. The 358H's mobile BGA 2540 socket means it is not upgradeable, while the 150UL's Socket 1700 allows for future processor swaps. For users who prioritize performance and are purchasing a new system, the 358H is the clear choice. For those who value low power consumption, desktop upgradability, and a higher boost clock, the 150UL remains a viable option.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core 7 150UL has 10 cores.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H supports LPDDR5X with a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 but has no recorded memory bandwidth figure.

Q: What process nodes do these processors use?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL uses a 10 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses a 3 nm process.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 12 MB on the Intel Core 7 150UL.

Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions?

A: The Intel Core 7 150UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses Arc B390 graphics.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 150UL | Intel Core Ultra X7 358H |

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

| Cores | 10 | 16 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 1.70 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

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

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 153.6 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | Arc B390 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-04-07 | 2026-01-04 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS) | Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H) |