Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the Intel Core 7 350 is extensive, covering Cinebench and Passmark tests. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL has no benchmark entries in the database, which means a direct score-for-score comparison is impossible for most metrics. The analysis must therefore rely on the single set of measurements for the Core 7 350 and its relative standing among other processors.

The Core 7 350 delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8030 and a single-core score of 2046. Its Cinebench R20 results show 5373 multi-core and 758 single-core, while R15 yields 1220 multi-core and 292 single-core. These figures indicate a processor that scales predictably across Cinebench versions, with the multi-core gains ranging from roughly 4.4x to 3.9x over single-core scores depending on the test iteration.

Passmark results for the Core 7 350 show a multithread score of 15170 and a single-thread score of 4100. The data compression test records 143123, data encryption records 10933, and extended instructions records 12045. Integer math scores 33734, floating point math scores 42809, and find prime numbers scores 107. Random string sorting scores 17238, and physics scores 1173.

The average benchmark score for the Core 7 350 is 17779, placing it at the 71st percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 5 221TE with an average score of 17860 (a delta of -0.5%), the AMD EPYC 9374F at 17693 (delta +0.5%), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (delta -0.6%), and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 (delta -0.7%). These deltas are exceptionally tight, all within a single percentage point of the Core 7 350. The data indicates that the Core 7 350 sits squarely in a competitive cluster where performance differences among these four rivals are statistically negligible.

For the Core Ultra 7 165UL, the database contains no benchmark scores, no average score, and no rival comparisons. Its percentile ranking is listed at 50, which is below the Core 7 350's 71st percentile. This percentile figure suggests that the Core Ultra 7 165UL, despite having no measured scores, is positioned lower in the overall distribution, but without actual test data, no quantitative head-to-head wins can be established for either processor.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 350 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Core 7 350 averages 17779. The Intel Core 5 221TE is closest at 17860 (-0.5%), followed by the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (-0.6%) and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 (-0.7%). The AMD EPYC 9374F is the only rival ahead, scoring 17693 (+0.5%). All four rivals are within one percentage point, so the data shows no meaningful performance separation.

Q: What is the Core 7 350's strongest Passmark result?

A: Data compression scores highest at 143123. This far exceeds the next largest result, floating point math at 42809, and integer math at 33734. The compression score indicates a strong showing in workloads that benefit from efficient data throughput.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 165UL have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists zero benchmark entries for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and it has no nearest rivals listed. Its percentile ranking of 50 appears without supporting measurement data.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread Cinebench R23 score?

A: Only the Core 7 350 has a recorded score, at 2046. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has no Cinebench data, so a comparison cannot be made from the database records.

Q: What is the Core 7 350's percentile position among all CPUs?

A: The Core 7 350 is at the 71st percentile. This places it above the Core Ultra 7 165UL, which sits at the 50th percentile. The percentile gap of 21 points suggests a higher overall standing for the Core 7 350, though the Core Ultra 7 165UL's lack of scores complicates direct interpretation.

Q: How do the two processors differ in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core 7 350 records 59.7 GB/s with single-channel memory support. The Core Ultra 7 165UL records 89.6 GB/s with dual-channel support. The Core Ultra 7 165UL shows a higher bandwidth figure, but no benchmark data exists to confirm how this translates into application performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 350 wins every measurable benchmark category because it is the only processor with recorded scores. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8030, single-core score of 2046, and Passmark multithread score of 15170 all stand as the sole data points. The 71st percentile ranking reinforces its position relative to the broader CPU population, and the narrow deltas against its four nearest rivals (all under 1%) suggest that in multi-threaded average workloads, it trades blows with the Intel Core 5 221TE, AMD EPYC 9374F, AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, and Intel Core 5 120U.

The Core Ultra 7 165UL has no benchmark wins because no benchmark data exists. Its 50th percentile ranking is the only comparative metric, and it falls 21 points below the Core 7 350. For use-case analysis, the database shows that the Core 7 350 delivers measured performance in single-threaded tasks (Cinebench R23 single-core 2046, Passmark single-thread 4100) and multi-threaded tasks (Cinebench R23 multi-core 8030, Passmark multithread 15170). The Core Ultra 7 165UL cannot be assigned any use-case advantage from the recorded data, as no workload-specific scores are available.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several core specification fields. The Core 7 350 uses 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses 12 cores and 14 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 350 and 1.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 4.90 GHz respectively. Both have a TDP of 15.

Sockets differ: the Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses Intel Socket 1851. Memory support differs as well: the Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth; the Core Ultra 7 165UL supports DDR5 (with motherboard dependence) on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe lanes differ: the Core 7 350 has Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), the Core Ultra 7 165UL has Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: the Core 7 350 has Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), the Core Ultra 7 165UL has Arc Xe-LPG 64EU.

Release dates differ: the Core 7 350 released on 2026-04-15, the Core Ultra 7 165UL on 2024-04-07. Launch MSRP values are $469 for the Core 7 350 and $447 for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. Part numbers are SAE3F and SRN95 respectively. Both processors are marked as active in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Neither supports ECC memory.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 350 is built on a 3 nm process node with the codename Wildcat Lake, and its generation is listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). The Core Ultra 7 165UL is built on a 7 nm process node with the architecture Meteor Lake and the codename Meteor Lake-PS, belonging to the Core Ultra Series 1 generation. The foundry for both is Intel.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 7 350 has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 165UL holds double the L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB), while the Core 7 350 holds more L1 and L2 per core.

The market segments differ: the Core 7 350 is listed as Mobile, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL is listed as Desktop. This aligns with their sockets and form factors. The architecture names and generations reflect different design lineages: Wildcat Lake for the Core 7 350 and Meteor Lake for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. The process node difference (3 nm vs 7 nm) represents a significant manufacturing gap, though no transistor or die size data is available to quantify the impact.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for the Intel Core 7 350, primarily because it is the only processor with measurable results. Its 71st percentile ranking, average score of 17779, and the tight cluster of rivals within 0.7% all indicate a solid mid-range performer that holds its own against the Intel Core 5 221TE, AMD EPYC 9374F, AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, and Intel Core 5 120U.

The Core Ultra 7 165UL offers a larger core count (12 vs 6), more threads (14 vs 6), a higher base clock (1.70 vs 1.50 GHz), a higher boost clock (4.90 vs 4.80 GHz), double the L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB), dual-channel memory (89.6 GB/s vs 59.7 GB/s), and more PCIe lanes (8 vs 6). These specifications suggest theoretical advantages in parallel workloads and memory throughput. However, the database contains zero benchmark scores for this processor, and its 50th percentile ranking is unverified by any measured test.

For a user selecting between these two based on the recorded data, the Core 7 350 is the only option with confirmed performance. Its 3 nm process node, mobile segment classification, and single-channel memory indicate a design aimed at efficiency and compact systems. The Core Ultra 7 165UL's desktop segment, dual-channel memory, and higher core count point toward a broader workload envelope, but without scores, the database cannot validate that potential. The launch MSRP difference is $22 ($469 vs $447), with the Core 7 350 priced higher despite fewer cores and lower memory bandwidth.

The verdict from the data: the Core 7 350 is the verified performer with a measurable track record and a 71st percentile standing. The Core Ultra 7 165UL is a specification-rich alternative whose actual performance remains unrecorded. Any workload comparison between the two cannot be made from benchmark results, as only one side has them. The Core 7 350 is the choice for buyers who require confirmed numbers. The Core Ultra 7 165UL would be chosen only on the strength of its listed specifications, which the database does not support with test evidence.