Intel Core 7 160UL vs Intel Core i7-9750H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the two processors. The Intel Core 7 160UL wins 14 of the 17 direct head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i7-9750H wins only 3. The most striking result is in PassMark random string sorting, where the i7-9750H leads by 67.7% (19862 vs 11843). That is the largest margin in either direction. The i7-9750H also holds a 57.5% advantage in extended instructions (9187 vs 5832) and a 38.1% lead in data compression (150443 vs 108953).

The Core 7 160UL answers with a 47.4% win in data encryption (7146 vs 3756). That is its largest margin, and it matters because encryption workloads often respond to newer instruction sets and memory paths. The Core 7 160UL also dominates in PassMark single-thread performance, scoring 3391 against 2404, a 29.1% gap. Integer math goes to the Core 7 160UL by 20.4% (47515 vs 37822), and physics by 18.2% (819 vs 670). Floating point math favors the Core 7 160UL by 9.1% (25670 vs 23343).

The Cinebench results are closer but consistently favor the Core 7 160UL. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 7 160UL scores 9386 against 8973, a 4.4% lead. Single-core R23 shows a similar 4.5% edge (1325 vs 1266). The pattern repeats in R20 and R15: every Cinebench test lands between 4.4% and 4.5% in favor of the Core 7 160UL. The PassMark multithread test gives the Core 7 160UL a modest 3.4% win (11043 vs 10671), and find prime numbers shows a 36% advantage for the Core 7 160UL (50 vs 32).

The overall average benchmark scores place the i7-9750H at 14886 and the Core 7 160UL at 14232. Both processors sit at the 69th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The i7-9750H's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 74F3 (0.2% lower average) and the Intel Core i3-10320 (0.2% higher). The Core 7 160UL's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (0.3% lower) and the Intel Core i5-10400F (0.3% higher). These deltas are tiny, meaning both processors occupy nearly the same performance tier despite their very different workload profiles.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different design eras and target different power envelopes. The Intel Core i7-9750H uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node, with a die size of 149 mm². It was released on 2019-04-22 and is now marked end-of-life. The Intel Core 7 160UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm node, released on 2024-04-07, and remains an active production part. The fabrication process difference alone explains much of the efficiency gap.

Core counts differ significantly. The i7-9750H has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Both have the same thread count, but the Core 7 160UL spreads that threading across four additional physical cores. Cache layouts reflect the newer design. The i7-9750H has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3. The Core 7 160UL has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, also with 12 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 on the Core 7 160UL is a notable architectural shift.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The i7-9750H has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Core 7 160UL has a lower base of 1.80 GHz but a much higher boost of 5.20 GHz. That 0.70 GHz boost advantage explains the single-thread wins. Thermal design power is where the gap becomes dramatic: the i7-9750H is rated at 45 W, while the Core 7 160UL is rated at 15 W. The Core 7 160UL delivers higher benchmark scores at one-third of the rated power.

Memory support differs as well. The i7-9750H supports only DDR4, while the Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The i7-9750H lists a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s; the Core 7 160UL does not have a recorded bandwidth figure in the database. PCIe support also differs: the i7-9750H uses Gen 3, while the Core 7 160UL uses Gen 4 with 8 CPU-only lanes. Integrated graphics are another clear upgrade: the i7-9750H has UHD 630, while the Core 7 160UL has Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different use cases. The Intel Core 7 160UL is the stronger all-around processor. It wins every Cinebench test, all but three PassMark tests, and does so while rated at 15 W instead of 45 W. The single-thread advantage of 29.1% in PassMark and the 20.4% lead in integer math make it the better choice for responsive everyday work and lightly threaded applications. The 47.4% encryption win and 36% prime number advantage suggest it handles security and mathematical workloads more efficiently.

The Intel Core i7-9750H is a specialist. Its 67.7% lead in random string sorting and 57.5% lead in extended instructions are enormous, and its 38.1% compression win shows real strength in data throughput tasks. For workloads that involve heavy string manipulation, SIMD-style extended instructions, or compression algorithms, the older chip is clearly superior. However, the i7-9750H's wins are concentrated in only three areas, and its 45 W rating makes it a less attractive option for power-constrained systems.

For a general-purpose desktop or mobile replacement, the Core 7 160UL is the safer pick based on the recorded scores. It wins the majority of tests, has a higher boost clock, newer architecture, and lower TDP. The i7-9750H should only be chosen when its specific benchmark strengths matter more than overall breadth. Neither processor is unlocked for overclocking, and both lack ECC memory support.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The i7-9750H has 6 cores and 12 threads; the Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.60 GHz versus 1.80 GHz, but boost clocks are 4.50 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. TDP is 45 W versus 15 W. Sockets are Intel BGA 1440 versus Intel Socket 1700. Architecture is Coffee Lake versus Raptor Lake, on 14 nm versus 10 nm process nodes. The i7-9750H has a recorded die size of 149 mm²; the Core 7 160UL has no die size listed.

Cache hierarchy differs in the per-core levels: L1 is 64 KB per core versus 80 KB per core, and L2 is 256 KB per core versus 1.25 MB per core. Both share 12 MB of L3. Memory support is DDR4 only versus DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 42.7 GB/s for the i7-9750H and not recorded for the Core 7 160UL. PCIe is Gen 3 for the i7-9750H versus Gen 4 with 8 CPU-only lanes for the Core 7 160UL. Integrated graphics are UHD 630 versus Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. Release dates are 2019-04-22 versus 2024-04-07. Production status is end-of-life versus active. The i7-9750H has a part number of SRF6USRFCP; the Core 7 160UL has an unknown part number.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, compared to 4.50 GHz for the Intel Core i7-9750H.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i7-9750H has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 9386 against 8973 for the i7-9750H, a 4.4% lead.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The i7-9750H is rated at 45 W, while the Core 7 160UL is rated at 15 W.

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 7 160UL supports DDR5; the i7-9750H supports DDR4 only.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between them?

A: The i7-9750H wins PassMark random string sorting by 67.7% (19862 vs 11843), the largest margin in the head-to-head data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 160UL is the winner for general productivity, single-thread responsiveness, and power-sensitive deployments. Its 29.1% single-thread lead and 20.4% integer math advantage cover most everyday applications. The 47.4% encryption win makes it a strong choice for security software, VPNs, or any workload involving cryptographic operations. The 36% prime number advantage and 18.2% physics lead point to better performance in scientific calculations and simulation tasks. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for compact systems where thermal headroom is limited.

The Intel Core i7-9750H wins in three specific areas that should not be overlooked. Random string sorting at 19862 versus 11843 suggests it handles sorting algorithms and text processing more efficiently. Extended instructions at 9187 versus 5832 indicate better performance in SIMD-heavy workloads such as multimedia encoding or signal processing. Data compression at 150443 versus 108953 makes it the better choice for archiving, backup, or database operations that rely on compression. Its 45 W TDP and end-of-life status are drawbacks, but for these narrow workloads, the recorded data clearly favors the older processor.

The overall benchmark averages are nearly identical, with the i7-9750H at 14886 and the Core 7 160UL at 14232. Both sit at the 69th percentile. The decision comes down to workload shape rather than overall capability. The Core 7 160UL is the broader, more modern choice; the i7-9750H is a specialist tool for compression and extended instruction workloads. For a user who knows their software relies on sorting, compression, or SIMD instructions, the i7-9750H has a measurable edge. For everyone else, the Core 7 160UL's higher boost clock, newer architecture, and lower power draw make it the data-supported default.