Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

The Intel Core 7 350 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus occupy distinct positions in the database, with the benchmark results revealing a clear performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, while the Core 7 350 records no wins in any category. This outcome is consistent with their respective market segments and architectural designs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates every benchmark category in the database, leaving no workload where the Intel Core 7 350 takes the lead. The largest margin appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 against 107 for the Core 7 350, a delta of 78 percent in favor of the desktop part. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also shows a 75 percent advantage in random string sorting, scoring 69090 versus 17238.

The Core 7 350, despite its losses, demonstrates its strongest relative performance in single-threaded tasks. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 7 350 scores 2046 against 2261 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, a gap of only 9.5 percent. Similarly, in PassMark single-thread, the Core 7 350 trails by 13.8 percent (4100 versus 4757). These results indicate that the mobile part closes much of the gap when only one core is active, whereas multi-threaded workloads expose the full difference in core counts and power envelopes.

The data shows the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is positioned for desktop computing with heavy multi-threaded demands. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30867 is 74 percent higher than the Core 7 350's 8030. The Core 7 350, with its 15 watt TDP and mobile BGA socket, appears oriented toward power-constrained environments where the smaller performance delta in single-core tasks matters more than absolute throughput. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, by contrast, records a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 7 350 sits at the 71st percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same 3 nm process node but use different foundries. The Core 7 350 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is produced by TSMC. The Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with a generation label of Core 5 (Wildcat Lake), whereas the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is based on Arrow Lake Refresh and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 with a generation label of Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake).

Core configuration differs substantially. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. Neither part uses simultaneous multithreading, as thread counts match core counts for both. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 7 350 has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both processors list 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The Core 7 350 has 2.5 MB of L2 per core and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus increases L2 to 3 MB per core and provides 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This larger L3 allocation supports the desktop part's higher core count and more demanding workloads.

Memory architecture further separates the two. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, roughly double the memory throughput. ECC memory support exists on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus but is absent on the Core 7 350.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The Core 7 350 provides PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the Intel Core 7 350 boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each CPU provide?

A: The Core 7 350 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus multiplier unlocked?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The Core 7 350 does not.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory. The Core 7 350 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Core 7 350 records 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth over a single-channel bus, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus records 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel bus.

Q: What market segments do these processors target?

A: The Core 7 350 is a mobile processor using the Intel BGA 1516 socket, and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1851.

Specification Differences

The database records several specification differences between the two processors. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. Base clocks differ at 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 350 versus 4.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Boost clocks reach 4.80 GHz on the mobile part and 5.30 GHz on the desktop part.

TDP ratings show a wide gap: 15 watts for the Core 7 350 versus 125 watts for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. The Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. Process nodes match at 3 nm, but the foundry differs: Intel for the Core 7 350, TSMC for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

L2 cache per core is 2.5 MB on the Core 7 350 and 3 MB on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Shared L3 cache totals 6 MB versus 30 MB. Memory support includes LPDDR5X on the Core 7 350 only, with both supporting DDR5. Memory bus width is single-channel for the Core 7 350 and dual-channel for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

ECC memory support is present on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus but not on the Core 7 350. PCIe generation and lane counts differ: Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics use 2 Xe cores on the Core 7 350 and 64 execution units on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. The multiplier is unlocked on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, while the Core 7 350 remains locked. Release dates show the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus appearing on 2026-03-10 and the Core 7 350 on 2026-04-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database, with all 17 recorded tests favoring the desktop part. Multi-core Cinebench results show the largest gaps. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 30867 against 8030 for the Core 7 350, a 74 percent difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 70.9 percent gap (18442 versus 5373), and Cinebench R15 multi-core records a 73.7 percent gap (4640 versus 1220).

Single-core Cinebench results narrow the margin considerably. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus a 9.5 percent win (2261 versus 2046). Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 70.9 percent gap but favors the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 2603 versus 758, which is an outlier compared to the R23 result. Cinebench R15 single-core shows an 11 percent gap (328 versus 292).

PassMark workloads follow a consistent pattern of large multi-threaded advantages. Data compression scores 568721 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus versus 143123 for the Core 7 350, a 74.8 percent gap. Data encryption shows a 74.1 percent gap (42144 versus 10933). Extended instructions record 44565 versus 12045, a 73 percent difference. Integer math delivers 125091 versus 33734, also 73 percent. Floating point math shows 162692 versus 42809, a 73.7 percent gap.

Prime number finding produces the largest relative difference at 78 percent (486 versus 107). Physics scores 3494 versus 1173, a 66.4 percent gap, the smallest multi-threaded margin in PassMark. Random string sorting shows 69090 versus 17238, a 75 percent difference. PassMark multi-thread scores 51596 versus 15170, a 70.6 percent gap. PassMark single-thread results narrow the overall picture to a 13.8 percent gap (4757 versus 4100).

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce the separation. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus averages 66855, while the Core 7 350 averages 17779. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 350 include the Intel Core 5 221TE at 17860 (0.5 percent above), the AMD EPYC 9374F at 17693 (0.5 percent below), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (0.6 percent above), and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 (0.7 percent above). The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus counts the AMD EPYC 4465P at 66925 (0.1 percent above), the Intel Xeon 6515P at 67006 (0.2 percent above), the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX at 67469 (0.9 percent above), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at 66159 (1.1 percent below) as its closest competitors. The data confirms that the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus operates in a significantly higher performance class, with the Core 7 350 functioning as a lower-power mobile alternative.