Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL Comparison

Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL: A Database Benchmark Analysis

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Core 7 350 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded benchmark scores in any of the standard test suites, so no direct comparison of measured performance is possible. All performance conclusions must rely on the architecture and specification differences recorded in the database.

For the Intel Core 7 350, the recorded benchmark data shows a consistent pattern of results across multiple testing methodologies. In Cinebench R15, the processor records a multicore score of 1220 and a singlecore score of 292. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore score rises to 5373 while singlecore reaches 758. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score is 8030 and singlecore is 2046. These Cinebench results demonstrate strong scaling from single-threaded to multi-threaded workloads, with the multicore scores roughly 4.2 times the singlecore scores in R20 and R23, while R15 shows a ratio of approximately 4.2 as well.

The PassMark suite provides additional granularity on the Core 7 350. Data compression scores 143123, while data encryption reaches 10933. Extended instructions score 12045, and the find prime numbers test produces a score of 107. Floating point math records 42809, integer math scores 33734, and multithread performance reaches 15170. Physics testing yields 1173, random string sorting scores 17238, and single thread performance is recorded at 4100. The average benchmark score for the Core 7 350 is 17779, placing it at the 71st percentile among all CPUs in the database.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for the Core 7 350's standing. The Intel Core 5 221TE posts an average score of 17860, which is 0.5% higher than the Core 7 350. The AMD EPYC 9374F scores 17693, putting it 0.5% lower than the Core 7 350. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT records 17891, a 0.6% advantage, and the Intel Core 5 120U scores 17898, 0.7% higher. These margins are narrow, indicating that the Core 7 350 sits in a tightly contested performance band where small differences separate adjacent entries.

The Core Ultra 5 135HL has zero recorded benchmarks and an average benchmark score of 0, which places it at the 50th percentile among all CPUs. This percentile value appears to be a default assignment rather than a measured result, as no test data exists to calculate a true percentile. The lack of benchmark entries means the database cannot establish any performance relationship between the two processors.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is listed under the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Core Ultra 5 135HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture with the Meteor Lake-PS codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 generation. These are distinct design families with different implementation strategies.

The process node differs substantially. The Core 7 350 is fabricated on a 3 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses a 7 nm process. Both are produced by Intel according to the foundry field. The smaller process node on the Core 7 350 suggests higher transistor density, though the database does not list transistor counts or die sizes for either processor.

Core and thread counts show a clear divergence. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads, indicating that 4 of its cores support hyperthreading while the remaining 10 do not. This gives the Core Ultra 5 135HL a significant theoretical advantage in parallel workloads, assuming the benchmark data existed to confirm it.

Cache hierarchies differ in both size and distribution. The Core 7 350 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 350 offers more per-core cache in L1 and L2, which can benefit single-threaded performance. The Core Ultra 5 135HL provides triple the L3 capacity, which helps when multiple cores share data across a larger working set.

Memory support also differs. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory types with a single-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 135HL supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The dual-channel configuration provides 50% more theoretical bandwidth, which can matter for memory-intensive workloads. Neither processor supports ECC memory according to the database.

PCIe connectivity shows a modest difference. The Core 7 350 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 135HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The additional lanes on the Core Ultra 5 135HL allow for more direct CPU-attached devices or higher-bandwidth configurations.

Integrated graphics differ in both branding and execution resources. The Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Arc Xe-LPG 128EU. The database does not provide comparative graphics benchmark scores, so the performance relationship remains qualitative.

The Core 7 350 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core 7 350 reaches a higher maximum frequency, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL starts from a higher base frequency.

The thermal design power differs significantly. The Core 7 350 is rated at 15 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL is rated at 45 watts. This tripling of the TDP envelope gives the Core Ultra 5 135HL more sustained power headroom, while the Core 7 350 targets lower-power operation.

Sockets and market segments also differ. The Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516 and is classified as a mobile processor. The Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Intel Socket 1851 and is classified as a desktop processor. The Core 7 350 was released on 2026-04-15, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL was released on 2024-04-07, making the latter the earlier product.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two processors designed for different roles with no overlapping benchmark results. The Core 7 350 has a complete benchmark profile demonstrating measurable performance at the 71st percentile. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has no benchmark data, leaving its performance unverified in the database.

For users prioritizing maximum thread throughput, the Core Ultra 5 135HL presents a theoretical advantage with 14 cores and 18 threads versus 6 cores and 6 threads on the Core 7 350. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth also favors the Core Ultra 5 135HL for data-heavy operations. The larger 18 MB L3 cache provides additional headroom for shared workloads.

For users prioritizing single-thread speed and power efficiency, the Core 7 350 shows advantages. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock exceeds the 4.60 GHz of the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The 15 watt TDP represents one-third of the Core Ultra 5 135HL's 45 watt rating, suggesting significantly lower power draw. The 3 nm process node versus 7 nm also indicates a more modern fabrication approach.

The launch MSRP for the Core 7 350 is $469. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

The data does not support declaring an overall winner because the Core Ultra 5 135HL lacks measured scores. The Core 7 350's benchmark results stand alone, with nearby rivals showing margins under 1% in either direction. Users choosing between these processors should weigh the Core 7 350's verified performance against the Core Ultra 5 135HL's unmeasured but architecturally different specifications.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors according to the database:

Cores: Core 7 350 has 6, Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14.

Threads: Core 7 350 has 6, Core Ultra 5 135HL has 18.

Base Clock: Core 7 350 runs at 1.50 GHz, Core Ultra 5 135HL at 1.70 GHz.

Boost Clock: Core 7 350 reaches 4.80 GHz, Core Ultra 5 135HL reaches 4.60 GHz.

TDP: Core 7 350 is rated at 15 watts, Core Ultra 5 135HL at 45 watts.

Socket: Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Intel Socket 1851.

Architecture: Core 7 350 has no listed architecture, Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Meteor Lake.

Codename: Core 7 350 is Wildcat Lake, Core Ultra 5 135HL is Meteor Lake-PS.

Generation: Core 7 350 is Core 5 (Wildcat Lake), Core Ultra 5 135HL is Ultra 5 (Meteor Lake-PS).

Process Node: Core 7 350 uses 3 nm, Core Ultra 5 135HL uses 7 nm.

L1 Cache: Core 7 350 has 192 KB per core, Core Ultra 5 135HL has 112 KB per core.

L2 Cache: Core 7 350 has 2.5 MB per core, Core Ultra 5 135HL has 2 MB per core.

L3 Cache: Core 7 350 has 6 MB shared, Core Ultra 5 135HL has 18 MB shared.

Memory Support: Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Core Ultra 5 135HL supports DDR5 with motherboard dependency.

Memory Bus: Core 7 350 is single-channel, Core Ultra 5 135HL is dual-channel.

Memory Bandwidth: Core 7 350 records 59.7 GB/s, Core Ultra 5 135HL records 89.6 GB/s.

PCIe: Core 7 350 has Gen 4 with 6 lanes, Core Ultra 5 135HL has Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

Integrated Graphics: Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Arc Xe-LPG 128EU.

Market Segment: Core 7 350 is mobile, Core Ultra 5 135HL is desktop.

Release Date: Core 7 350 released 2026-04-15, Core Ultra 5 135HL released 2024-04-07.

Launch MSRP: Core 7 350 is $469, Core Ultra 5 135HL has no listed value.

Part Number: Core 7 350 is SAE3F, Core Ultra 5 135HL is SRN33.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads, while the Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How do their clock speeds compare?

A: The Core 7 350 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core 7 350 has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Core 7 350 is fabricated on a 3 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses a 7 nm process.

Q: What are their thermal design power ratings?

A: The Core 7 350 is rated at 15 watts, and the Core Ultra 5 135HL is rated at 45 watts.

Q: Does the database contain benchmark scores for both processors?

A: The Core 7 350 has a full set of benchmark scores across Cinebench and PassMark tests. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 350 wins in scenarios that benefit from higher boost frequency and lower power consumption. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock exceeds the Core Ultra 5 135HL's 4.60 GHz, which can translate to faster single-threaded execution in lightly threaded applications. The 15 watt TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained mobile environments, and the 3 nm process node indicates a newer fabrication technology. The 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core provide larger per-core cache allocations, which can reduce latency for frequently accessed data. The Core 7 350 achieves a 71st percentile ranking among all CPUs based on its measured average benchmark score of 17779.

The Core Ultra 5 135HL wins in scenarios that require high thread counts and large shared caches. Its 14 cores and 18 threads provide more than double the parallel execution capacity of the Core 7 350. The 18 MB L3 cache is three times larger, enabling better data sharing across cores. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth offers 50% more memory throughput, which benefits workloads that stream large datasets. The 45 watt TDP allows for sustained high-power operation in desktop configurations. The desktop market segment classification and Intel Socket 1851 indicate it is designed for systems without the power constraints of mobile platforms.

The recorded data shows no benchmark scores for the Core Ultra 5 135HL, so its wins are architectural rather than measured. The Core 7 350's wins are backed by concrete test results in the database, including Cinebench R23 multicore of 8030 and singlecore of 2046, plus PassMark multithread of 15170 and single thread of 4100. The nearest rivals to the Core 7 350 all fall within 0.7% of its average score, indicating tight competition in its performance class. The Core Ultra 5 135HL occupies the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0, reflecting the absence of data rather than a measured performance level.