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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 7 350. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42,718 versus 8,030, a delta of -81.2%. This indicates that the desktop part delivers more than five times the multi-threaded render performance in that specific workload.

Single-core results tell a similar story, though the gap narrows. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus records 6,030 against 2,046 for the Core 7 350, a -66.1% delta. The smallest relative difference in the entire dataset is in PassMark single-thread tests: 4,698 versus 4,100, a -12.7% delta. This suggests that while the Core 7 350 trails in every measured category, its single-thread deficit is far less severe than its multi-thread deficit.

Cinebench R15 and R20 show consistent patterns. In R15 multi-core, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4,305 versus 1,220 (-71.7%), and in R20 multi-core it scores 17,941 versus 5,373 (-70.1%). Single-core R20 shows the same percentage gap as multi-core R20, both at -70.1%, with scores of 2,532 versus 758. The single-core R15 gap is smaller at -51.9%, with 607 versus 292.

PassMark integer math favors the Ultra 5 250KF Plus by 123,030 to 33,734 (-72.6%). Floating point math shows 159,824 versus 42,809 (-73.2%). Data compression scores 553,155 versus 143,123 (-74.1%), and data encryption scores 41,292 versus 10,933 (-73.5%). The extended instructions test records 42,880 versus 12,045 (-71.9%), while finding prime numbers shows 452 versus 107 (-76.3%). Physics simulation records 3,183 versus 1,173 (-63.1%). Random string sorting shows 67,209 versus 17,238 (-74.4%). PassMark multi-thread scores 50,146 versus 15,170 (-69.7%).

The average benchmark score reflects this dominance. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average score of 66,159, while the Core 7 350 sits at 17,779. The percentile ranking confirms the separation: the Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, whereas the Core 7 350 sits at the 71st percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different segments and use different silicon strategies. The Intel Core 7 350 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516, built on a 3 nm process at Intel foundries. Its codename is Wildcat Lake, and it belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851, also on a 3 nm node, but fabricated by TSMC. Its codename is Arrow Lake Refresh, and it belongs to the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, also without hyper-threading. Clock speeds favor the desktop chip: base clock of 4.20 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. Thermal design power differs by a wide margin, 125 W versus 15 W, which aligns with the mobile versus desktop positioning.

Cache hierarchies share the same L1 size per core at 192 KB, but differ beyond that. The Core 7 350 has 2.5 MB L2 per core and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 3 MB L2 per core and 30 MB shared L3. The desktop part also lists 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the mobile part has no transistor or die size data recorded.

Memory support differs. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is not supported on the mobile chip but is supported on the desktop chip. PCIe lanes also differ: Gen 4 with 6 lanes for the Core 7 350, versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

Integrated graphics are present on the Core 7 350 as Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics. The multiplier is locked on the mobile part and unlocked on the desktop part. Release dates show the Core 7 350 appearing on 2026-04-15 and the Ultra 5 250KF Plus on 2026-03-10.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the stronger processor in every recorded test. Its 93rd percentile ranking, average score of 66,159, and 18-core configuration place it in a different performance class than the Core 7 350. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus include the Intel Core 9 273PQE at 66,099 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65,914 (0.4% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66,855 (-1% delta). These comparisons show that the Ultra 5 250KF Plus competes at the high end of desktop processors.

The Core 7 350, meanwhile, sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17,891, -0.6% delta) and Intel Core 5 120U (17,898, -0.7% delta) in average score. Its 71st percentile ranking reflects a mid-tier position among all CPUs. The single-thread gap of -12.7% in PassMark is the closest margin recorded, but it is still a loss for the mobile chip.

Selection depends on the platform. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus requires a desktop socket, a dual-channel DDR5 memory setup, and a discrete GPU due to the lack of integrated graphics. The Core 7 350 suits a mobile platform with integrated graphics, single-channel memory, and lower power limits. The data does not support any scenario where the Core 7 350 outperforms the Ultra 5 250KF Plus in raw performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the single-core benchmark difference?

A: In PassMark single-thread tests, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4,698 versus 4,100 for the Core 7 350, a delta of -12.7%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 6,030 versus 2,046, a delta of -66.1%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 7 350 does not.

Q: What memory types are supported?

A: The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average benchmark score of 66,159, while the Core 7 350 has an average score of 17,779.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database. Its largest advantages appear in multi-threaded workloads: Cinebench R23 multi-core at -81.2%, data compression at -74.1%, and random string sorting at -74.4%. These results align with its 18-core configuration, larger 30 MB L3 cache, higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz, and dual-channel memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.

The Intel Core 7 350 does not win any recorded comparison. However, its profile suggests specific strengths that the benchmarks do not capture directly. It includes integrated graphics, which removes the need for a separate GPU in a mobile system. Its 15 W TDP and single-channel memory support point to low-power operation. Its smaller differences in single-thread tests, particularly the -12.7% PassMark single-thread gap, indicate that lightly threaded tasks are the closest area of competition.

The Ultra 5 250KF Plus also shows strong single-thread performance, winning PassMark single-thread by 4,698 to 4,100 and Cinebench R23 single-core by 6,030 to 2,046. The desktop chip leads in every PassMark workload category: integer math, floating point math, encryption, compression, extended instructions, prime number finding, physics, and random string sorting.

For use-case planning, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus fits workloads that scale with cores, cache, and memory bandwidth, such as rendering, compression, and physics simulation. The Core 7 350 fits mobile platforms where integrated graphics, lower power draw, and a compact BGA socket matter more than peak throughput. The data does not show any benchmark where the Core 7 350 takes the lead.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 350 | Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 18 |

| Threads | 6 | 18 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | N/A |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production status | Active | Active |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-03-10 |

| Launch MSRP | $469 | $184 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part number | SAE3F | SA4V3 |