Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core i7-14701E Comparison

Intel Core 7 350 and Intel Core i7-14701E represent two very different design philosophies from Intel. The Core 7 350 is a low-power mobile part built on a 3 nm process, while the i7-14701E is a high-core-count desktop processor on the Raptor Lake architecture. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the i7-14701E winning all 17 head-to-head comparisons, but the nature of those wins varies significantly by workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic difference appears in multi-threaded rendering. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-14701E scores 22195 against 8030 for the Core 7 350, a 63.8% advantage. That gap narrows somewhat in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i7-14701E leads by 42.4% (9321 vs 5373). The R15 multi-core test shows a 45.5% lead for the i7-14701E (2237 vs 1220). These results confirm that the i7-14701E’s 8 cores and 16 threads vastly outperform the Core 7 350’s 6 cores and 6 threads in heavily parallel workloads.

Single-core performance is closer but still favors the i7-14701E. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7-14701E scores 3133 versus 2046, a 34.7% lead. The R20 single-core test shows a 42.4% advantage (1315 vs 758), while R15 single-core is the tightest gap at 7.3% (315 vs 292). PassMark single-thread results repeat that pattern: 4305 for the i7-14701E versus 4100, a modest 4.8% edge.

Integer math exposes the largest raw performance delta. The i7-14701E scores 81325 in PassMark integer math, which is 58.5% ahead of the Core 7 350’s 33734. Data compression also heavily favors the i7-14701E, with 282939 versus 143123, a 49.4% lead. Floating-point math shows a 30.8% advantage for the i7-14701E (61873 vs 42809), and extended instructions come in at 35% (18528 vs 12045).

The remaining PassMark tests all fall in the 26% to 51% range. Physics performance is 51.1% higher on the i7-14701E (2399 vs 1173). Multithreaded PassMark shows a 41.9% lead (26112 vs 15170). Random string sorting is 40.9% ahead (29158 vs 17238). Prime number finding is 39.2% better (176 vs 107). Data encryption is the smallest gap in this group at 26.4% (14862 vs 10933).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-14701E has an average benchmark score of 33206, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 350 averages 17779, which is the 71st percentile. That is a difference of 15427 points in favor of the i7-14701E.

Q: How does the Core 7 350 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core 7 350 sits within 0.7% of three competing processors. It is 0.5% behind the Intel Core 5 221TE (which averages 17860), 0.6% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891), and 0.7% behind the Intel Core 5 120U (17898). It is 0.5% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9374F (17693).

Q: What are the closest rivals to the i7-14701E?

A: The i7-14701E is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H, which scores 33201, a delta of 0%. It is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS (33244), 0.3% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX (33091), and 0.4% behind the Intel Core i7-13650HX (33089).

Q: In which benchmark does the Core 7 350 come closest to matching the i7-14701E?

A: The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread performance, where the Core 7 350 scores 4100 versus 4305, a 4.8% deficit. Cinebench R15 single-core is also close, with a 7.3% gap (292 vs 315).

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i7-14701E leads by 63.8% (22195 vs 8030). PassMark integer math is second at 58.5% (81325 vs 33734).

Q: Does the i7-14701E win any benchmark by a narrow margin?

A: No. The i7-14701E wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The narrowest wins are 4.8% in PassMark single-thread and 7.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core. Every other win exceeds 26%.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-14701E outperforms the Intel Core 7 350 in every measured benchmark. The i7-14701E is the correct choice for any workload where raw compute throughput matters, including multi-threaded rendering, integer-heavy calculations, data compression, and physics simulations. Its 83rd percentile ranking versus the Core 7 350’s 71st percentile reflects a processor that sits a full tier higher in overall capability.

The Core 7 350 is not without merit, but its strengths lie outside raw benchmark scores. It uses a 3 nm process, has a 15 W TDP against 65 W for the i7-14701E, and is designed for mobile platforms with a BGA 1516 socket. For a builder or buyer prioritizing single-thread efficiency per watt, the Core 7 350 comes within 4.8% to 7.3% of the i7-14701E in single-core tests. That is a meaningful result for light-threaded workloads on battery power.

However, for desktop users with access to Socket 1700 and a 65 W power budget, the i7-14701E is the overwhelmingly faster part. The 63.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and the 58.5% lead in integer math show that the i7-14701E is in a different performance class. The choice is straightforward: the i7-14701E for maximum compute, the Core 7 350 only when the mobile form factor or power envelope is the primary constraint.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification. The Core 7 350 uses 6 cores and 6 threads, while the i7-14701E has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 350 and 2.60 GHz for the i7-14701E. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 5.40 GHz, respectively. TDP is 15 W versus 65 W.

Sockets are incompatible: the Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the i7-14701E uses Intel Socket 1700. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-14701E supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded. ECC memory is false on the Core 7 350 and true on the i7-14701E. PCIe lanes differ: Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the Core 7 350, Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the i7-14701E. The integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on the Core 7 350 and UHD Graphics 770 on the i7-14701E.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 350 is built on Wildcat Lake architecture using a 3 nm process, with a codename of Wildcat Lake and a generation listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). The i7-14701E uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, on a 10 nm process, with a die size of 257 mm². The Core 7 350 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i7-14701E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The i7-14701E has a much larger L3 cache, which contributes to its strong multi-threaded performance. The Core 7 350’s smaller L3 is consistent with its low-power mobile positioning.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-14701E wins every single recorded benchmark, so the analysis is about the magnitude of its wins. Its biggest advantages are in multi-core rendering (63.8% in Cinebench R23) and integer math (58.5%). Data compression (49.4%), physics (51.1%), and multithreaded PassMark (41.9%) also show massive leads. These are the workloads where the i7-14701E’s 16 threads and 33 MB of L3 cache deliver outsized returns.

The Core 7 350’s closest performances are in single-thread tests. It is only 4.8% behind in PassMark single-thread and 7.3% behind in Cinebench R15 single-core. For tasks that are strictly single-threaded and do not scale with core count, the Core 7 350 is much closer in capability. Its 15 W TDP and 3 nm process also suggest far better energy efficiency, though the database does not record power consumption figures for direct comparison.

In practical terms, the i7-14701E is the pick for desktop workstations, content creation, compilation, and any software that uses more than a few threads. The Core 7 350 is the pick for a thin-and-light mobile system where battery life and thermals are the limiting factors, accepting a large multi-core penalty in exchange for a much lower power envelope. The benchmark data shows no scenario where the Core 7 350 wins on raw performance, but its single-core margins are small enough to be acceptable in lightly threaded mobile use.