Intel Core 7 240H vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core 7 240H, which wins 13 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. The Intel Core 7 360 takes four wins, but those come in specific single-threaded and specialized workloads. The magnitude of the 240H's wins is substantial, often exceeding 50% deltas.

The largest margin belongs to PassMark integer math, where the 240H scores 80,396 against the 360's 34,238, a 134.8% advantage. This is a massive gap and indicates that the 240H's core configuration and higher power envelope deliver far superior throughput for arithmetic-heavy integer workloads. Data compression follows a similar pattern: the 240H posts 271,774 versus 142,877, a 90.2% delta. This workload scales heavily with core count and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the 240H.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 240H scores 2,360 versus 1,374, a 71.8% lead. The R20 multicore test shows a 49.5% advantage with scores of 8,562 against 5,726. The R23 multicore gap narrows to 15.6%, with the 240H at 15,764 and the 360 at 13,634. The shrinking delta across Cinebench generations suggests that the newer R23 workload is less sensitive to the 240H's raw throughput advantage.

PassMark multithread confirms the pattern, with the 240H at 23,975 versus 15,544, a 54.2% lead. Random string sorting shows a 63.7% delta, with scores of 28,866 and 17,636. Physics simulation favors the 240H by 42%, posting 1,723 versus 1,213. Floating point math gives the 240H a 31% lead, 58,905 against 44,963. Extended instructions favor the 240H by 36.4%, with 16,897 versus 12,390. Data encryption shows a 35.7% delta, 15,155 against 11,164.

The 360's wins are concentrated in single-threaded efficiency. PassMark single thread shows the 360 at 4,274 versus 3,782, an 11.5% advantage. Cinebench R23 single core gives the 360 a 10.7% lead, scoring 1,924 against 1,719. The 360 also wins the find prime numbers test, 120 versus 102, a 15% delta. These wins indicate that the 360 has a superior per-core architecture, likely due to its newer process node, but that advantage does not compensate for the 240H's core count and thread count advantages in most workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core 7 240H uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It is a 10-core, 16-thread part with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The 240H carries a 45 W TDP and uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process node. It is a 6-core, 6-thread part with no hyperthreading, a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The 360 has a dramatically lower 15 W TDP and uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket. Its cache structure is different: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

The process node difference is significant. The 3 nm fabrication gives the 360 a transistor density advantage that explains its single-thread performance wins despite lower clock speeds. The 360's boost clock is 4.80 GHz versus 5.20 GHz for the 240H, yet the 360 still wins PassMark single thread and Cinebench R23 single core. This indicates superior instructions-per-clock from the newer microarchitecture.

Memory support diverges sharply. The 240H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus. The 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel memory bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The dual-channel configuration of the 240H is likely a significant factor in its data compression and integer math wins, as those workloads are memory-bandwidth sensitive.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The 240H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The 240H's integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics with 64 execution units. The 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Both are mobile market segments, both are actively in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The 240H was released on December 17, 2024, with a launch MSRP of $502. The 360 was released on April 15, 2026, with a launch MSRP of $426. The 240H belongs to the Core 7 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation, while the 360 belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 240H dominates in heavily threaded and memory-intensive workloads. The 134.8% lead in integer math makes it the clear choice for computational tasks that rely on arithmetic throughput. Data compression, where the 240H leads by 90.2%, benefits from both core count and memory bandwidth. The dual-channel memory bus is an asset here, as compression algorithms frequently move large data blocks.

The 240H also wins in Cinebench multicore tests across all three versions (R15, R20, R23), making it the stronger option for rendering workloads. The 71.8% lead in R15 and 49.5% lead in R20 are substantial, though the R23 margin narrows to 15.6%. The 240H's PassMark multithread score of 23,975 versus 15,544 confirms its advantage in parallelizable tasks.

The 360's wins are all in single-threaded or latency-sensitive workloads. Its PassMark single thread score of 4,274 beats the 240H's 3,782 by 11.5%. The Cinebench R23 single core win of 1,924 versus 1,719 shows a 10.7% advantage. The find prime numbers test, which relies on fast integer division and branch prediction, goes to the 360 by 15%.

The 360's single-channel memory bus does not appear to hamper its single-threaded performance, but it likely contributes to its losses in memory-bandwidth-sensitive tests. The 360's lower TDP of 15 W versus 45 W also suggests it is designed for power-constrained environments, though the data does not include battery life or thermal measurements.

The average benchmark score reflects the overall gap. The 240H posts an average of 31,483, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. The 360 averages 18,374, placing it in the 72nd percentile. The 240H sits within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX and the Intel Core Ultra 3 205, both with average scores near 31,473 to 31,495. The 360's nearest rivals are desktop-class i3 parts, including the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18,380 and the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18,318.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload type. For users running multithreaded applications, rendering, data compression, or heavy integer math, the Intel Core 7 240H is the superior processor. Its 10-core, 16-thread configuration, dual-channel memory support, and 45 W power envelope deliver consistent wins across 13 of 17 benchmarks. The 134.8% integer math lead and 90.2% data compression lead are decisive.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in single-threaded workloads and prime number finding. Its 3 nm process node and newer Wildcat Lake architecture deliver better per-core performance despite lower clock speeds. The 11.5% PassMark single thread lead and 10.7% Cinebench R23 single core lead indicate that for lightly threaded applications, the 360 is the faster chip.

The 240H's wins are larger in magnitude than the 360's. The largest 360 win is 15% in find prime numbers, while the 240H has four wins exceeding 50% (integer math at 134.8%, data compression at 90.2%, R15 multicore at 71.8%, random string sorting at 63.7%). The 240H also wins the average benchmark comparison by a wide margin: 31,483 versus 18,374.

The 360's lower TDP of 15 W and single-channel memory bus suggest a different intended use case, likely thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency matters more than raw throughput. The 240H's 45 W TDP and dual-channel memory indicate a performance-oriented mobile platform.

The percentile rankings reinforce this. The 240H sits at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the 360 sits at the 72nd. The 240H's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX, a high-end mobile part, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H. The 360's nearest rivals are Intel Core i3 desktop parts, indicating its performance class is entry-level.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks overall?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core 7 360 wins 4.

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

A: PassMark integer math shows the largest delta, with the 240H scoring 80,396 versus the 360's 34,238, a 134.8% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 360 win any single-threaded tests?

A: Yes, the 360 wins PassMark single thread with 4,274 versus 3,782 (an 11.5% lead) and Cinebench R23 single core with 1,924 versus 1,719 (a 10.7% lead).

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ?

A: The 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The 240H uses a dual-channel memory bus supporting DDR4 and DDR5. The 360 uses a single-channel bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 240H averages 31,483 across all benchmarks, placing it in the 82nd percentile. The 360 averages 18,374, placing it in the 72nd percentile.