Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a one-sided contest. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX wins every single matchup. The Intel Core 7 350 does not record a single win. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 34,731 against the Core 7 350's 8,030, a lead of 76.9%. This is the most decisive margin in the entire dataset.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though with a narrower gap. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 4,903 versus 2,046 for the Core 7 350, a 58.3% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test shows the smallest delta of any comparison: the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 4,683, only 12.4% ahead of the Core 7 350's 4,100. This indicates that for lightly threaded workloads, the Core 7 350 is comparatively less disadvantaged, though it still trails.

Multi-threaded workloads amplify the difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the Core Ultra 5 235HX at 14,587 versus 5,373 for the Core 7 350, a 63.2% gap. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 3,500 against 1,220, a 65.1% deficit for the Core 7 350. PassMark multi-thread scores are 40,849 for the Core Ultra 5 235HX and 15,170 for the Core 7 350, placing the Core 7 350 62.9% behind.

The PassMark suite reveals consistent advantages across all sub-tests. Data compression shows the Core Ultra 5 235HX at 426,417 versus 143,123, a 66.4% lead. Data encryption shows 32,697 against 10,933, a 66.6% gap. Extended instructions score 34,808 versus 12,045, a 65.4% difference. Prime number finding shows the largest relative gap after Cinebench R23 multi-core: 361 against 107, a 70.4% deficit. Floating point math scores 129,819 versus 42,809, a 67% lead. Integer math scores 97,177 versus 33,734, a 65.3% difference. Random string sorting shows 50,929 versus 17,238, a 66.2% gap. Physics scores 2,550 versus 1,173, a 54% advantage, the smallest multi-threaded margin in the PassMark set.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture. The Core Ultra 5 235HX averages 52,073 across all tests, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 350 averages 17,779, placing it in the 71st percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 5 235HX include the AMD EPYC 8124P at 52,121 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X at 51,947 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i7-14700 at 52,301 (0.4% ahead), and the Intel Core i9-13900F at 51,730 (0.7% behind). The Core 7 350's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 5 221TE at 17,860 (0.5% ahead), the AMD EPYC 9374F at 17,693 (0.5% behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17,891 (0.6% ahead), and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17,898 (0.7% ahead). The Core 7 350 sits in a much tighter cluster, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX competes with much higher-tier desktop and server parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX wins every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core it scores 4,903 against 2,046, a 58.3% lead. In PassMark single-thread it scores 4,683 versus 4,100, a 12.4% lead.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235HX leads by 76.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (34,731 vs 8,030) and by 62.9% in PassMark multi-thread (40,849 vs 15,170). The smallest multi-threaded gap is PassMark physics at 54% (2,550 vs 1,173).

Q: What do the percentile rankings show?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235HX sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 350 sits in the 71st percentile. The Core Ultra 5 235HX's average score of 52,073 places it near the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X and Intel Core i7-14700, while the Core 7 350's 17,779 places it near the Intel Core 5 120U.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235HX has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235HX boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Core 7 350 boosts to 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 235HX also has a higher base clock at 2.90 GHz versus 1.50 GHz.

Q: How do the integrated graphics differ?

A: The Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 235HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 48 execution units. The Core Ultra 5 235HX also has a significantly higher power envelope.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, with its generation listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). The Core Ultra 5 235HX uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-HX, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: Intel manufactures the Core 7 350, while TSMC manufactures the Core Ultra 5 235HX.

The Core Ultra 5 235HX has a substantially larger physical implementation. It contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 7 350's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. This size difference reflects the Core Ultra 5 235HX's higher core count and larger cache hierarchy.

Cache configurations diverge significantly. Both processors share the same L1 cache size at 192 KB per core. The L2 cache differs: the Core 7 350 has 2.5 MB per core, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX has 3 MB per core. The L3 cache shows the largest gap: the Core 7 350 has 6 MB shared, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX has 24 MB shared, four times as much.

Memory support also differs. The Core 7 350 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX supports DDR5 only. The Core 7 350 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 235HX uses a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, nearly double the throughput. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCI Express connectivity is a major architectural differentiator. The Core 7 350 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 5 235HX provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). This gives the Core Ultra 5 235HX more than three times the lane count and a newer generation, which matters for discrete GPUs and NVMe storage.

The Core Ultra 5 235HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 7 350 does not. This affects overclocking capability. The Core Ultra 5 235HX also has a higher TDP at 55 watts versus 15 watts for the Core 7 350, reflecting its higher performance ceiling and greater power draw.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear separation between the two parts. Core count: 6 for the Core 7 350, 14 for the Core Ultra 5 235HX. Threads: 6 for both, as neither supports hyper-threading. Base clock: 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 350, 2.90 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 235HX. Boost clock: 4.80 GHz versus 5.10 GHz. TDP: 15 watts versus 55 watts.

Socket compatibility differs: the Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX uses Intel BGA 2114. These are not interchangeable sockets. The part numbers differ as well: SAE3F for the Core 7 350, SRVFL for the Core Ultra 5 235HX.

Release dates are out of order. The Core Ultra 5 235HX was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core 7 350 was released on 2026-04-15. The Core 7 350 therefore appears after the Core Ultra 5 235HX in the product stack, despite its lower performance. The Core 7 350 has a launch MSRP of $469. The Core Ultra 5 235HX has no recorded launch MSRP.

Both processors are active in production and target the mobile market segment. Neither supports ECC memory. The memory bus width, PCIe generation, and lane counts differ as noted above. The Core Ultra 5 235HX's integrated graphics uses the Arc Xe-LPG architecture with 48 execution units, while the Core 7 350 uses Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows zero wins for the Core 7 350 across all 17 benchmark comparisons. The Core Ultra 5 235HX wins every test. This makes the use-case split straightforward.

For multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, or any workload that scales across cores, the Core Ultra 5 235HX delivers massive advantages. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 76.9% lead, and PassMark integer math shows a 65.3% lead. The 14-core configuration with 24 MB of L3 cache provides a strong foundation for parallel workloads.

For single-threaded tasks, the Core Ultra 5 235HX still wins, but by a smaller margin. PassMark single-thread shows only a 12.4% gap. This suggests that for everyday responsive tasks, web browsing, or lightly threaded applications, the Core 7 350 is comparatively closer in performance, though still behind.

For memory-bandwidth-sensitive applications, the Core Ultra 5 235HX has a clear edge with 102.4 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. The dual-channel bus and newer PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 lanes make it more suitable for systems with discrete graphics or high-speed storage. The Core 7 350's single-channel bus and Gen 4 lanes limit its ability to feed data to peripherals.

The Core 7 350's smaller footprint (15 watts TDP, 6 cores, 6 threads) makes it relevant for low-power, thin-and-light mobile designs. Its performance is comparable to the Intel Core 5 120U in the database, and it sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT in average score. It is not a performance part; it is a mainstream mobile processor.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. It leads by margins ranging from 12.4% in PassMark single-thread to 76.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its 91st percentile ranking, 14 cores, 24 MB L3 cache, dual-channel memory, and PCIe Gen 5 support place it in a different performance class than the Core 7 350.

The Core 7 350, with its 71st percentile ranking and 6 cores, competes with lower-tier mobile and desktop parts like the Intel Core 5 120U and AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT. Its single-channel memory and Gen 4 PCIe lanes further limit its system-level capabilities. Its 15-watt TDP and Wildcat Lake architecture make it suitable for power-efficient mobile designs, but not for demanding workloads.

For users who need multi-threaded performance, memory bandwidth, or PCIe connectivity, the Core Ultra 5 235HX is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users prioritizing low power consumption in a compact mobile package, the Core 7 350 offers a more modest performance envelope. The two parts are not direct competitors; the Core Ultra 5 235HX occupies a substantially higher performance tier, as confirmed by its average score of 52,073 versus 17,779 for the Core 7 350.