Intel Core 7 250H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H, which wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. However, the Intel Core 7 250H secures four wins, and the nature of those wins reveals a distinct performance profile for each chip.

The Core Ultra 7 366H dominates in rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28477 against the Core 7 250H's 16561, a 41.8% advantage. The single-core gap is even more pronounced: the Ultra 7 366H posts 4020 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1931 for the Core 7 250H, a 52% lead. Cinebench R20 shows a similar pattern, with the Ultra 7 366H ahead by 18.9% in multi-core (11960 vs 9697) and 19% in single-core (1688 vs 1368). The only Cinebench test the Core 7 250H wins is R15 multi-core, where it scores 3147 against 2870, a 9.7% margin. In R15 single-core, the Ultra 7 366H reverses that with a 405 score versus 298, a 26.4% advantage.

PassMark results reinforce the Ultra 7 366H's broad superiority. Data encryption shows a 29.6% lead (25845 vs 18206), extended instructions a 35.6% lead (26901 vs 17318), and floating point math a 37.2% lead (103615 vs 65094). Physics performance favors the Ultra 7 366H by 36.7% (2880 vs 1824). Random string sorting goes to the Ultra 7 366H by 14.3% (39814 vs 34136), and multithread performance by 19.1% (33429 vs 27030). Data compression sees a narrower 7.4% lead for the Ultra 7 366H (327455 vs 303269). The largest single delta in the entire comparison is in prime number finding, where the Ultra 7 366H scores 326 versus 106 for the Core 7 250H, a 67.5% blowout.

The Core 7 250H's wins are concentrated in specific workloads. Integer math favors it by 18.4% (99100 vs 83695). PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests (identical scores of 4148) edge out the Ultra 7 366H's 4043, a 2.6% margin in both cases. These results indicate the Core 7 250H retains an advantage in pure integer throughput and narrowly wins the PassMark single-thread metric, despite losing Cinebench single-core tests by wide margins.

The average benchmark score tells the overall story: the Core Ultra 7 366H averages 41263 across all tests, while the Core 7 250H averages 35728. That places the Ultra 7 366H in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 85th percentile for the Core 7 250H. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 250H include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 (average score 35719, delta 0%), the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H (35670, delta 0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (35802, delta -0.2%). The Ultra 7 366H's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (41215, delta 0.1%), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41208, delta 0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41376, delta -0.3%). These figures place the two chips in different competitive tiers, with the Ultra 7 366H sitting alongside desktop-class parts like the Ryzen 9 5900X.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and use different manufacturing processes. The Core 7 250H is built on Raptor Lake architecture (Raptor Lake-H codename) and uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 366H uses Panther Lake architecture (Panther Lake codename) and a 3 nm process node, also fabricated by Intel. This process advantage likely contributes to the Ultra 7 366H's higher performance per clock and lower power draw.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 7 250H thus supports Hyper-Threading-style thread doubling, while the Ultra 7 366H has more physical cores but no thread doubling. Despite having fewer threads, the Ultra 7 366H wins most multi-threaded benchmarks, indicating its Panther Lake cores are substantially more efficient.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 250H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 366H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 366H's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches likely help its single-core performance, while the Core 7 250H's larger L3 pool provides more shared capacity.

Clock speeds and power targets are markedly different. The Core 7 250H has a 2.50 GHz base clock and a 5.40 GHz boost clock, with a 45 W TDP. The Ultra 7 366H has a 2.00 GHz base clock and a 4.80 GHz boost clock, with a 25 W TDP. The Core 7 250H runs at higher frequencies and consumes more power, yet the Ultra 7 366H still beats it in most tests, underscoring the architectural efficiency of Panther Lake.

Memory support and PCIe lanes differ as well. The Core 7 250H supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. The Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. PCIe connectivity favors the Ultra 7 366H with Gen 5 at 12 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 7 250H offers Gen 5 at 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 7 250H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Ultra 7 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not provide execution unit counts for the Xe3, but the architecture generation difference is clear.

Sockets and release dates also separate the pair. The Core 7 250H uses Intel BGA 1744 and was released on 2024-12-17. The Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540 and was released on 2026-01-04. The Core 7 250H has a launch MSRP of $502; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 7 366H. Both chips are listed as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has an average benchmark score of 41263, compared to 35728 for the Intel Core 7 250H.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H scores 4020 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 52% higher than the Core 7 250H's 1931.

Q: In which benchmark does the Core 7 250H show its largest advantage?

A: The Core 7 250H wins PassMark integer math by 18.4%, scoring 99100 versus 83695 for the Core Ultra 7 366H.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How do the power targets compare?

A: The Core 7 250H has a 45 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has a 25 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 250H boosts to 5.40 GHz, which is higher than the Core Ultra 7 366H's 4.80 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 7 250H supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice for different workloads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the stronger overall processor, winning 13 of 17 head-to-head tests and averaging 41263 versus 35728. Its advantages are largest in single-core and rendering tasks, with a 52% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and a 41.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. It also leads in encryption, floating point, physics, and multithread workloads by margins ranging from 7.4% to 67.5%. The 3 nm Panther Lake architecture, 16 physical cores, and larger per-core caches (192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2) support this performance, all within a 25 W TDP.

The Intel Core 7 250H retains specific strengths. It wins PassMark integer math by 18.4% and edges out the Ultra 7 366H in PassMark single-thread by 2.6%. Its 14 cores and 20 threads, higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and larger 24 MB L3 cache serve workloads that favor integer throughput. The 45 W TDP and older Raptor Lake architecture place it behind the Ultra 7 366H in most productivity and content-creation benchmarks, but it is not without merit for integer-heavy tasks.

For users prioritizing rendering, encryption, physics simulation, or general multithreaded performance, the Core Ultra 7 366H is the data-backed choice. For workloads dominated by integer math or for those needing the specific PassMark single-thread edge, the Core 7 250H holds a narrower but real advantage. The percentile rankings confirm the Ultra 7 366H sits higher in the overall CPU landscape at the 87th percentile versus the 85th for the Core 7 250H.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 250H | Intel Core Ultra 7 366H |

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

| Cores | 14 | 16 |

| Threads | 20 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

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

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 115.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Release Date | 2024-12-17 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $502 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRQ6UQ5MK | SA4R9Q9EL |