Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Intel Core 7 350 and Intel Core 7 360 share the same Wildcat Lake codename, 3 nm process node, and 6-core/6-thread configuration, yet their benchmark results diverge sharply in several key areas. The database records 17 head-to-head tests between these two mobile processors, with the Core 7 360 winning 14 of them and the Core 7 350 taking 3. Average benchmark scores place the Core 7 350 at 17779 and the Core 7 360 at 18374, a difference of about 3.3%. Both chips sit in the 71st and 72nd percentiles of all CPUs respectively, so they occupy nearly the same overall performance tier, but the distribution of wins reveals distinct strengths.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in the entire comparison comes from Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Core 7 360 scores 13634 against 8030 for the Core 7 350, a delta of -41.1% from the Core 7 350's perspective. That is a massive gap in heavily threaded rendering workloads, and it is the single largest margin of victory in either direction across all 17 tests. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a smaller but still clear edge for the Core 7 360, 1374 versus 1220, an 11.2% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core returns 5726 for the Core 7 360 against 5373 for the Core 7 350, a 6.2% advantage.

Single-core results tell a different story, and the Core 7 350 claims the biggest win of the entire set in Cinebench R15 single-core. There it scores 292 against 193 for the Core 7 360, a 51.3% lead. That is an extraordinary outlier, as the other single-thread tests are far closer. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Core 7 350 a 2046 to 1924 win, a 6.3% margin. Cinebench R20 single-core, however, flips to the Core 7 360, which scores 808 versus 758, a 6.2% advantage. So the two chips split the single-core Cinebench results, with the Core 7 350 leading in R15 and R23 but trailing in R20.

PassMark tests mostly favor the Core 7 360, but by modest margins. Data compression is the exception, where the Core 7 350 edges ahead 143123 to 142877, a 0.2% difference. The Core 7 360 wins data encryption 11164 to 10933 (2.1%), extended instructions 12390 to 12045 (2.8%), find prime numbers 120 to 107 (10.8%), floating point math 44963 to 42809 (4.8%), integer math 34238 to 33734 (1.5%), multithread 15544 to 15170 (2.4%), physics 1213 to 1173 (3.3%), and random string sorting 17636 to 17238 (2.3%). In passmark_single_thread, the Core 7 360 records 4274 against 4100 for the Core 7 350, a 4.1% lead, and the duplicate passmark_singlethread result shows the same numbers.

The pattern is clear: the Core 7 360 dominates multi-core and most mixed workloads, while the Core 7 350 only wins Cinebench R15 single-core, Cinebench R23 single-core, and PassMark data compression. The Core 7 360's multi-core advantage in Cinebench R23 is particularly striking, and that single test accounts for most of the average score gap between the two chips.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 3 nm process node and use the Wildcat Lake codename, with the same generation label of Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). They share the same socket, Intel BGA 1516, and both have 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no Hyper-Threading on either part. Base clocks are identical at 1.50 GHz, and boost clocks match at 4.80 GHz. The cache hierarchy is also identical: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. There is no 3D V-Cache on either chip, and total L3 is not separately listed beyond the shared figure.

Memory support is the same on both, with DDR5 and LPDDR5X compatibility, a single-channel memory bus, and 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Neither chip supports ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the CPU only. Integrated graphics are identical as well, with Intel Xe3 Graphics featuring 2 Xe cores. Both are mobile market segment parts with active production status, and both were released on the same date, April 15, 2026. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The only architectural difference that appears in the database is the part number: SAE3F for the Core 7 350 and SAE3E for the Core 7 360. No other specification field differs between the two chips. This makes the benchmark divergence particularly interesting, since the recorded specs would suggest near-identical behavior, yet the results show meaningful differences, especially in multi-core Cinebench. The launch MSRP differs, with the Core 7 350 at $469 and the Core 7 360 at $426, but that is a pricing detail and not a performance attribute.

The fact that two chips with the same core count, same clocks, same cache, and same process node produce such different Cinebench R23 multi-core scores indicates that the measured samples may have operated under different conditions, such as sustained power delivery or thermal headroom, even though the TDP is listed as 15 for both. The database does not record power draw figures beyond the 15 W TDP, so the cause of the multi-core gap cannot be attributed to any specific specification difference in the pack.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 350 wins in exactly three recorded tests, and they fall into two categories. First, it leads in Cinebench R15 single-core by a wide 51.3% margin, which is the largest relative win of the entire comparison. Second, it leads in Cinebench R23 single-core by 6.3%, a more modest but still consistent single-thread advantage. Third, it wins PassMark data compression by a razor-thin 0.2%, a workload that is often sensitive to memory latency and per-core efficiency. These results suggest that the Core 7 350 can deliver higher peak single-thread performance in certain Cinebench versions, and it holds a slight edge in compression-style data handling.

The Core 7 360 wins everywhere else, and its dominance in multi-core is the headline. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 41.1% advantage, which is far larger than any other multi-core gap in the set. Cinebench R15 multi-core gives it an 11.2% lead, and Cinebench R20 multi-core a 6.2% lead. In PassMark, the Core 7 360 wins 11 of the 12 recorded tests, with margins ranging from 1.5% in integer math to 10.8% in find prime numbers. It also wins the single-thread PassMark tests by 4.1%. The Core 7 360's win count of 14 out of 17 makes it the clear overall performer in the database's head-to-head record.

For use cases, the Core 7 350 is better suited to workloads that emphasize single-thread Cinebench rendering at lower core utilization, and it has a slight edge in data compression tasks. The Core 7 360 is the stronger choice for multi-core rendering, prime number calculations, floating point math, encryption, extended instruction sets, physics simulations, random string sorting, and general multithreaded PassMark workloads. Given the size of the Cinebench R23 multi-core gap, any application that scales across all six cores will favor the Core 7 360 substantially.

Specification Differences

Most specification fields are identical between the two processors, so the list of differences is short. The part number differs: SAE3F for the Core 7 350 and SAE3E for the Core 7 360. The launch MSRP also differs, with the Core 7 350 listed at $469 and the Core 7 360 at $426. No other specification field in the database shows a difference. Cores, threads, base clock, boost clock, TDP, socket, codename, process node, foundry, cache sizes, memory support, memory bus, memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe lanes, integrated graphics, market segment, production status, release date, and multiplier unlock status are all the same.

Because the specifications are otherwise identical, the benchmark differences cannot be traced to any documented hardware divergence. The database does not include transistor counts or die sizes for either chip, so those potential differentiators are not available for comparison. The recorded differences in performance may stem from sample variation, power management behavior, or firmware, but the data pack does not provide fields for those variables. The only objective differences are the part number and the launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has an average benchmark score of 18374, while the Intel Core 7 350 scores 17779. That places the Core 7 360 about 3.3% higher on average.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmark tests did each processor win?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 won 14 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 7 350 won 3.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the comparison?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core 7 360 scores 13634 against 8030 for the Intel Core 7 350, a delta of -41.1% from the Core 7 350's side.

Q: In which tests does the Intel Core 7 350 come out ahead?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 wins Cinebench R15 single-core (292 to 193, a 51.3% lead), Cinebench R23 single-core (2046 to 1924, a 6.3% lead), and PassMark data compression (143123 to 142877, a 0.2% lead).

Q: Do the two processors share the same core and thread configuration?

A: Yes, both have 6 cores and 6 threads, with the same base clock of 1.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: What is the difference in launch MSRP between the two chips?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 has a launch MSRP of $469, and the Intel Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426.

Q: Are there any cache size differences between the two processors?

A: No. Both have 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3.