Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 3 205 Comparison

Intel Core 7 350 and Intel Core Ultra 3 205 occupy different tiers of Intel’s mobile and desktop lineups, respectively, and the benchmark data reflects a clear performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra 3 205 wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Core 7 350 takes a single victory in Cinebench R15 single-core. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 3 205 is 31,473, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 350 averages 17,779 and sits in the 71st percentile. These figures establish the Core Ultra 3 205 as the substantially faster processor across nearly every workload measured.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 350 demonstrates its sole advantage in Cinebench R15 single-core testing, scoring 292 versus 282 for the Core Ultra 3 205, a 3.5% margin. This result indicates that in lightly threaded legacy rendering tasks, the Wildcat Lake chip can edge ahead despite its lower overall performance profile. Outside that single test, the Core Ultra 3 205 dominates every other benchmark category, including all multicore Cinebench versions, all PassMark compute tests, and single-thread workloads measured by PassMark.

The Core Ultra 3 205 wins decisively in heavily threaded applications. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 59.6% advantage, with scores of 19,856 versus 8,030. PassMark multithread testing reveals a 42% lead (26,167 versus 15,170). Data compression workloads favor the Core Ultra 3 205 by 45.1%, with 260,651 versus 143,123. Integer math performance is 38.4% higher, floating point math is 43% higher, and extended instructions are 46.7% higher. Prime number finding, a workload sensitive to both core count and clock speed, shows the largest relative gap at 60.1%, with 268 versus 107.

For single-thread performance outside Cinebench, the Core Ultra 3 205 maintains its lead. PassMark single-thread scores are 4,575 versus 4,100, a 10.4% difference. This suggests the Arrow Lake architecture provides a stronger single-core foundation in most measured scenarios, even though the Core 7 350 wins the specific Cinebench R15 test. The Core Ultra 3 205 also leads in physics simulation (2,016 versus 1,173, a 41.8% gap), random string sorting (31,083 versus 17,238, a 44.5% gap), and data encryption (18,772 versus 10,933, a 41.8% gap).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families built on the same 3 nm process node but fabricated by different foundries. The Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation, with Intel as the foundry. The Core Ultra 3 205 uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, belongs to the Ultra 3 (Arrow Lake) generation, and is fabricated by TSMC. This foundry split, combined with distinct architectural designs, explains much of the performance disparity.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 3 205 has 8 cores and 8 threads, also without hyperthreading, but with two additional physical cores. Clock speeds favor the Core Ultra 3 205 substantially: base clock of 3.80 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. These differences in core count and base frequency contribute directly to the multicore performance gap.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both processors share 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache per core is 2.5 MB on the Core 7 350 and 3 MB on the Core Ultra 3 205. The shared L3 cache shows a larger difference: 6 MB on the Core 7 350 versus 15 MB on the Core Ultra 3 205. The larger L3 cache on the Arrow Lake part provides more capacity for frequently accessed data across all eight cores.

Memory architecture separates the two further. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 3 205 supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. This nearly doubling of memory bandwidth benefits the Core Ultra 3 205 in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The PCIe configuration differs as well: Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the Core 7 350 versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the Core Ultra 3 205.

The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 7 350 using Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 3 205 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units. The Core Ultra 3 205 also reveals a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 7 350 does not have these figures recorded. The Core Ultra 3 205 targets the desktop segment with Socket 1851 and a 57 TDP, whereas the Core 7 350 targets mobile with Intel BGA 1516 and a 15 TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent pattern with one exception. Cinebench R15 multicore favors the Core Ultra 3 205 at 2,001 versus 1,220, a 39% difference. Cinebench R15 single-core is the only test where the Core 7 350 wins, scoring 292 versus 282, a 3.5% margin. Cinebench R20 multicore gives the Core Ultra 3 205 an 8,339 to 5,373 result, a 35.6% lead, while R20 single-core shows the same 35.6% gap in favor of the Core Ultra 3 205 at 1,177 versus 758. Cinebench R23 multicore produces the largest Cinebench gap at 59.6%, with 19,856 versus 8,030. R23 single-core shows a 27% lead for the Core Ultra 3 205 at 2,803 versus 2,046.

The PassMark suite reinforces the Core Ultra 3 205’s dominance. Data compression scores 260,651 versus 143,123, a 45.1% advantage. Data encryption reaches 18,772 versus 10,933, a 41.8% gap. Extended instructions show 22,578 versus 12,045, a 46.7% difference. Prime number finding yields 268 versus 107, the most pronounced relative gap at 60.1%. Floating point math produces 75,136 versus 42,809, a 43% lead. Integer math follows at 54,755 versus 33,734, a 38.4% difference. Multithread performance is 26,167 versus 15,170, a 42% gap. Physics scores 2,016 versus 1,173, a 41.8% difference. Random string sorting shows 31,083 versus 17,238, a 44.5% gap. Both PassMark single-thread tests record the same result: 4,575 versus 4,100, a 10.4% lead for the Core Ultra 3 205.

The only benchmark where the Core 7 350 wins, Cinebench R15 single-core, represents a narrow victory that does not carry over to newer Cinebench versions. The Core Ultra 3 205 leads R20 and R23 single-core by 35.6% and 27%, respectively, indicating that the Core 7 350’s R15 win is an outlier specific to that test version.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. Core count is 6 for the Core 7 350 and 8 for the Core Ultra 3 205. Thread count follows at 6 versus 8. Base clock is 1.50 GHz versus 3.80 GHz, a substantial difference favoring the Core Ultra 3 205. Boost clock is closer at 4.80 GHz versus 4.90 GHz, still favoring the Core Ultra 3 205. TDP is 15 watts for the Core 7 350 and 57 watts for the Core Ultra 3 205, reflecting mobile versus desktop design targets.

Socket type differs completely: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 7 350, Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra 3 205. The codenames are Wildcat Lake versus Arrow Lake-S, and the generations are Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) versus Ultra 3 (Arrow Lake). The foundry is Intel for the Core 7 350 and TSMC for the Core Ultra 3 205. Process node is identical at 3 nm for both.

L2 cache per core is 2.5 MB versus 3 MB, and shared L3 cache is 6 MB versus 15 MB. Memory support shows DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Core 7 350 versus DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 3 205. Memory bus is single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. PCIe generation is Gen 4 versus Gen 5, with 6 lanes versus 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units. Market segment is mobile versus desktop.

Transistor count and die size are recorded only for the Core Ultra 3 205 at 17,800 million and 243 mm². Release dates differ, with the Core 7 350 launching on 2026-04-15 and the Core Ultra 3 205 on 2025-07-31. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 350 is $469, and for the Core Ultra 3 205 it is $140. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both support ECC memory, with the field showing false for both.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 has an average benchmark score of 31,473, compared to 17,779 for the Intel Core 7 350. The Core Ultra 3 205 also places in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 350 sits in the 71st percentile.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmarks does each processor win?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core 7 350 wins 1, specifically the Cinebench R15 single-core test.

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

A: The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 scores 268 versus 107 for the Intel Core 7 350, a 60.1% difference. Cinebench R23 multicore also shows a large gap at 59.6%, with scores of 19,856 versus 8,030.

Q: How do the core counts and clock speeds compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.90 GHz versus 4.80 GHz, both favoring the Core Ultra 3 205.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 uses a dual-channel DDR5 memory bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 350 uses a single-channel bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 has 15 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 7 350 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. L2 cache per core also differs at 3 MB versus 2.5 MB.