Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V Comparison

Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V: a clear split between single-thread speed and multi-thread throughput. The benchmark database shows two mobile processors with different design philosophies, and the recorded data favors each in distinct areas.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in the database is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core 7 350 scores 2046 against the Ultra 5 226V's 1744, a 17.3% advantage. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R15 single-core, with the Core 7 350 winning 292 to 267, a 9.4% lead. PassMark single-thread confirms the trend: 4100 versus 3754, another 9.2% win for the Core 7 350.

The multi-threaded results tell the opposite story. The Ultra 5 226V takes Cinebench R23 multi-core with 9848 points versus 8030, an 18.5% margin. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the gap is 6381 to 5373, a 15.8% difference. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 1501 against 1220, which is 18.7% in favor of the Ultra 5 226V.

The data compression test in PassMark also favors the Ultra 5 226V, scoring 170687 versus 143123, a 16.1% lead. Data encryption follows with 12710 against 10933, a 14% advantage. Extended instructions show 14724 versus 12045, an 18.2% gap. The largest single delta in the entire comparison is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 226V scores 166 versus 107, a 35.5% blowout.

Floating point math favors the Ultra 5 226V at 52270 versus 42809, an 18.1% margin. Integer math is closer but still favors the Ultra 5 226V: 38647 versus 33734, a 12.7% difference. PassMark multi-thread shows 17850 against 15170, a 15% lead. Physics simulation favors the Ultra 5 226V at 1449 versus 1173, a 19% gap. Random string sorting rounds out the list with 20813 versus 17238, a 17.2% advantage.

One anomaly exists in the data. Cinebench R20 single-core lists the Ultra 5 226V as the winner at 900 versus 758, a 15.8% margin, which contradicts the other single-core results. The database records this as a win for the Ultra 5 226V, and the overall win count stands at 13 for the Ultra 5 226V and 4 for the Core 7 350.

The Verdict

The average benchmark score in the database places the Ultra 5 226V ahead at 19368 versus 17779, a difference of roughly 8.2%. The percentile ranking confirms this: the Ultra 5 226V sits at the 73rd percentile against all CPUs, while the Core 7 350 sits at the 71st. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 350 include the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891, which the Core 7 350 trails by 0.6%, and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898, a 0.7% gap. The Ultra 5 226V's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS at 19364, a 0% delta, and the Intel Core i7-8700K at 19238, which the Ultra 5 226V leads by 0.7%.

For workloads that use many threads, the Ultra 5 226V is the stronger part. The data shows consistent double-digit wins across Cinebench multi-core, PassMark multi-thread, compression, encryption, and math workloads. The 8 cores versus 6 cores and the dual-channel memory bus likely explain the breadth of these wins.

For single-thread responsiveness, the Core 7 350 has the edge. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock versus 4.50 GHz and its higher single-core scores in Cinebench R15, R23, and PassMark make it the pick when per-thread speed matters most.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 350 wins in four recorded tests: Cinebench R15 single-core, Cinebench R23 single-core, and both PassMark single-thread entries. These results point to workloads that depend on one core's speed: light office tasks, web browsing, and older software that does not scale across cores. The 17.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the standout number for this part.

The Ultra 5 226V wins everywhere else. Its largest margin comes in PassMark find prime numbers at 35.5%, which indicates a major advantage in pure integer calculation loops. The 19% win in physics simulation suggests better performance in game physics or similar floating-point-heavy code. The 16.1% lead in data compression and 14% in encryption point to faster file archiving and secure data handling. The 18.2% win in extended instructions covers SIMD-heavy applications such as video encoding or scientific computing.

The single-core anomaly in Cinebench R20 deserves attention. The Ultra 5 226V wins that test by 15.8%, which is the only Cinebench single-core result that does not favor the Core 7 350. Builders who rely on Cinebench R20 as a reference should weigh this against the R15 and R23 results, which both favor the Core 7 350.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V boosts to 4.50 GHz.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores. Both have the same number of threads as cores.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V scores 9848, which is 18.5% higher than the Intel Core 7 350's 8030.

Q: Which processor wins in PassMark single-thread?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 scores 4100, a 9.2% advantage over the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V's 3754.

Q: Do both processors use the same memory configuration?

A: No. The Intel Core 7 350 uses single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V uses dual-channel memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design lineages. The Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Ultra 5 226V uses Lunar Lake. Both are built on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ: the Core 7 350 is fabricated by Intel, and the Ultra 5 226V is fabricated by TSMC.

The core counts differ. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither uses Hyper-Threading, so thread counts equal core counts for both parts.

The integrated graphics differ significantly. The Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 5 226V uses Arc 130V graphics. The database does not record benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so a direct performance comparison is not available from this data.

Memory support differs. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 5 226V's memory support is listed as depending on the motherboard, with a dual-channel memory bus and no recorded bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core 7 350 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 5 226V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The newer PCIe generation on the Ultra 5 226V offers more per-lane bandwidth, though the Core 7 350 has more lanes available.

Release dates are far apart. The Core 7 350 launched on April 15, 2026, while the Ultra 5 226V launched on September 23, 2024. The Core 7 350 is the newer part by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The base clocks differ: the Core 7 350 runs at 1.50 GHz, while the Ultra 5 226V runs at 2.10 GHz. The boost clocks reverse this order: 4.80 GHz for the Core 7 350 versus 4.50 GHz for the Ultra 5 226V.

Thermal design power differs slightly. The Core 7 350 has a 15 W TDP, while the Ultra 5 226V has a 17 W TDP.

The sockets are not interchangeable. The Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Ultra 5 226V uses Intel BGA 2833.

L1 and L2 cache are identical: 192 KB per core and 2.5 MB per core respectively. L3 cache differs, with the Core 7 350 at 6 MB shared and the Ultra 5 226V at 8 MB shared.

ECC memory support is false for both. Neither processor supports error-correcting memory.

The launch MSRP for the Core 7 350 is $469. The Ultra 5 226V has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Production status is active for both parts. Neither multiplier is unlocked on either processor.

The Core 7 350's part number is SAE3F, while the Ultra 5 226V's part number is SRPMQSRPMR. The Ultra 5 226V belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family, while the Core 7 350 has no recorded series.