Intel Core 7 253PQE vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE records an average benchmark score of 55919, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H records 40518. The difference places the Core 7 253PQE in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, versus the 87th percentile for the Core Ultra X7 368H.

Q: How does the Core 7 253PQE compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Core 7 253PQE sits within 1.1% of several high-end parts. It trails the Intel Core i9-14900HX by 0.2%, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 by 0.6%, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 by 0.7%, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX by 1.1%.

Q: What is the single biggest benchmark win for either processor?

A: The largest delta in the head-to-head results is the PassMark integer math test, where the Intel Core 7 253PQE scores 137795 versus 88083 for the Core Ultra X7 368H, a 56.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Core Ultra X7 368H win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra X7 368H wins two tests. It scores 321 versus 206 in PassMark find prime numbers (a 35.8% margin in its favor) and 105681 versus 105279 in PassMark floating point math (0.4% ahead).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not list ECC support.

Q: How do the two processors differ in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has a higher rated memory bandwidth at 153.6 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the Intel Core 7 253PQE. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Core Ultra X7 368H supports LPDDR5X while the Core 7 253PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing nodes and design generations. The Intel Core 7 253PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process, built by Intel, and belongs to the Core 7 generation. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses the Panther Lake architecture under the Panther Lake-H codename, on a 3 nm process, also built by Intel, and belongs to the Ultra X7 generation within Core Ultra Series 3.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 7 253PQE has 10 cores and 20 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it does not use multithreading and each core handles a single thread. Thread count is effectively similar (20 versus 16), but the physical core count favors the Ultra part.

Cache layouts also differ. The Core 7 253PQE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra X7 368H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Ultra part has more private cache per core, while the Core 7 part has nearly double the total L3.

The Core 7 253PQE targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra X7 368H is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2540. The desktop part also has a wider PCIe implementation: Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only) for the mobile chip. Integrated graphics differ as well, with UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 7 253PQE and Arc B390 on the Core Ultra X7 368H. Both have production status listed as Active, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 253PQE wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its strongest areas are integer-heavy workloads, multithreaded throughput, and data manipulation tasks. The PassMark integer math score of 137795 is 56.4% ahead of the Ultra part, and the data compression score of 487335 is 55.7% ahead. Random string sorting also favors the Core 7 253PQE by 42.3%, and extended instructions by 26.2%. The multithread score of 41656 is 26.4% higher, and the physics score of 2970 is 4% higher. In all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core), the Core 7 253PQE leads by 11.2%. Data encryption shows a narrow 1.1% edge, and single-thread PassMark results show a 9.6% lead.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins two tests. The find prime numbers score of 321 versus 206 is a 35.8% advantage, suggesting a specific strength in prime-number search workloads. The floating point math score of 105681 is 0.4% ahead of the Core 7 253PQE's 105279, a marginal but real edge in floating point throughput.

The benchmark split indicates the Core 7 253PQE is the stronger overall processor for mainstream compute, especially for tasks that scale with thread count and integer performance. The Core Ultra X7 368H shows a niche advantage in prime-number workloads and a near tie in floating point math, but its lower thread count and smaller L3 cache appear to limit its showing elsewhere.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 7 253PQE | Intel Core Ultra X7 368H |

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

| Cores | 10 | 16 |

| Threads | 20 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.70 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 125 | 25 |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Bartlett 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 | 33 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc B390 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $409 | Not provided |

The base clock difference is stark: 3.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, with 5.70 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. The TDP figures are far apart, with the desktop part at 125 and the mobile part at 25. The Core 7 253PQE has a larger L3 cache, while the Core Ultra X7 368H has more L1 and L2 per core. Memory bandwidth favors the mobile chip, but the desktop chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 as well as ECC.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core 7 253PQE scores 3163 against 2844, a 11.2% lead. The same 11.2% margin appears in R15 singlecore (446 versus 401), R20 multicore (13183 versus 11852), R20 singlecore (1861 versus 1673), R23 multicore (31390 versus 28221), and R23 singlecore (4431 versus 3984). The uniform delta across all six Cinebench workloads indicates the performance gap is structural, not workload-specific.

PassMark results reveal larger swings. The data compression test shows the Core 7 253PQE at 487335 versus 312927, a 55.7% difference. Integer math shows 137795 versus 88083, a 56.4% difference. Random string sorting shows 54222 versus 38093, a 42.3% difference. Extended instructions show 32390 versus 25669, a 26.2% difference. The multithread score of 41656 versus 32956 is a 26.4% difference.

The Core Ultra X7 368H counters in two areas. The find prime numbers test shows 321 versus 206, a 35.8% margin in its favor. Floating point math shows 105681 versus 105279, a 0.4% edge. These two wins do not offset the Core 7 253PQE's dominance in the other 15 comparisons, but they do show that the mobile processor has specific computational strengths.

Data encryption is the closest contest overall, with 25515 versus 25228, a 1.1% difference. The physics test is also close, with 2970 versus 2857, a 4% difference. Single-thread PassMark results show 4389 versus 4005, a 9.6% difference.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear overall winner in the Intel Core 7 253PQE. It holds the advantage in 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench workload, all major PassMark throughput tests, and the multithread score. Its average benchmark score of 55919 places it in the 91st percentile, and its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-14900HX, AMD Ryzen AI Max 390, AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470, and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX, all within 1.1%. The Core 7 253PQE is a desktop processor with a 125 TDP, dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support, ECC memory, and a 33 MB shared L3 cache, and its recorded data supports strong multithreaded and integer performance.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is not without merit. It wins the find prime numbers test by 35.8% and floating point math by 0.4%. It has 16 physical cores versus 10, a 3 nm process node, higher per-core L1 and L2 caches, and a 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth rating. It also carries a 25 TDP, making it a mobile-focused design. However, its average benchmark score of 40518 sits in the 87th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 7 253PE and Intel Core 5 223PE, both within 0.2%.

The data suggests the choice depends on context. For desktop workloads where thread count, integer math, and sustained multithreaded performance matter, the Core 7 253PQE is the stronger part by a wide margin. For a mobile platform with lower power draw, the Core Ultra X7 368H offers more physical cores and higher memory bandwidth, but its benchmark results trail in most categories. The Core 7 253PQE is the better performer in the recorded tests, while the Core Ultra X7 368H is the more power-efficient design with a specific edge in prime-number workloads and a marginal lead in floating point math.