Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF dominates every recorded benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. The database shows 17 wins for the Core Ultra 7 265KF and zero wins for the Intel Core 7 350. The largest single-core margin appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Core Ultra 7 265KF scores 2948 against 758, a delta of -74.3%. The smallest single-core gap is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core Ultra 7 265KF posts 4928 versus 4100, a delta of -16.8%.

Multi-core workloads show even wider separation. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 265KF scores 49736 versus 8030, a delta of -83.9%. This is the largest percentage difference across all tests. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar pattern: 5013 versus 1220, a delta of -75.7%. The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265KF delivers roughly five to six times the multi-threaded output in Cinebench workloads.

Integer and floating-point math tests reinforce the trend. PassMark integer math shows 143351 for the Core Ultra 7 265KF versus 33734 for the Core 7 350, a delta of -76.5%. PassMark floating-point math shows 189431 versus 42809, a delta of -77.4%. Data compression and encryption follow suit: the Core Ultra 7 265KF scores 666589 in compression versus 143123, a delta of -78.5%, and 48198 in encryption versus 10933, a delta of -77.3%.

Single-core performance is closer but still clearly favors the Core Ultra 7 265KF. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 707 versus 292, a delta of -58.7%. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 7021 versus 2046, a delta of -70.9%. The PassMark single-thread score of 4928 versus 4100 represents the narrowest gap, indicating that the Core 7 350 is relatively competitive in lightly threaded tasks despite its overall deficit.

Other workloads confirm the pattern. PassMark extended instructions show 54513 versus 12045, a delta of -77.9%. Find prime numbers shows 486 versus 107, a delta of -78%. Physics simulation shows 3633 versus 1173, a delta of -67.7%. Random string sorting shows 79735 versus 17238, a delta of -78.4%. Multithreaded PassMark shows 58518 versus 15170, a delta of -74.1%.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. No test in the comparison favors the Intel Core 7 350. The Core Ultra 7 265KF's advantage is largest in multi-core Cinebench R23, where it leads by 83.9%, and smallest in PassMark single-thread, where it leads by 16.8%. This suggests the Core Ultra 7 265KF is the superior choice for both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads, though its edge narrows when a single thread is the limiting factor.

The Intel Core 7 350, while trailing in all recorded tests, shows relative strength in single-thread PassMark. Its score of 4100 sits within 16.8% of the Core Ultra 7 265KF's 4928, whereas multi-core tests show gaps exceeding 70%. The data indicates the Core 7 350 is best suited for workloads that depend primarily on single-thread performance and low power draw, but it cannot match the Core Ultra 7 265KF in any measured benchmark.

For extended instruction sets, encryption, and compression, the Core Ultra 7 265KF's lead is consistently between 77% and 79%. These workloads benefit from the larger core count and higher memory bandwidth of the Core Ultra 7 265KF. The Core 7 350's integrated Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) provides a feature the Core Ultra 7 265KF lacks, as the latter has no integrated graphics, but this does not affect CPU benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in design. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF uses the Arrow Lake-S codename and belongs to the Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake) generation. It has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz.

Both processors are built on a 3 nm process node, but they use different foundries. The Core 7 350 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 265KF is fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 7 265KF contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the transistor count and die size for the Core 7 350 are not recorded.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both have 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The Core 7 350 has 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 265KF has 3 MB of L2 cache per core and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 cache on the Core Ultra 7 265KF aligns with its higher multi-core performance.

Memory support also differs. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 265KF supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 265KF's higher memory bandwidth contributes to its advantages in data-heavy workloads.

PCIe capabilities are split by generation. The Core 7 350 provides PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 7 265KF provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 7 265KF also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 7 350 does not. The Core 7 350 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), whereas the Core Ultra 7 265KF has no integrated graphics.

The market segments differ: the Core 7 350 targets mobile devices with a 15 W TDP and an Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Core Ultra 7 265KF targets desktop systems with a 125 W TDP and an Intel Socket 1851. The Core 7 350's release date is recorded as 2026-04-15, while the Core Ultra 7 265KF's release date is 2024-10-23. Launch MSRP for the Core 7 350 is $469, and launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 7 265KF is $379.

The Verdict

The benchmark data delivers a clear verdict: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF outperforms the Intel Core 7 350 in every recorded test. The Core Ultra 7 265KF holds the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 7 350 sits at the 71st percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 265KF is 71910, compared to 17779 for the Core 7 350.

Nearest rival comparisons reinforce the gap. The Core 7 350's closest rivals include the Intel Core 5 221TE (avg score 17860, delta -0.5%), AMD EPYC 9374F (avg score 17693, delta 0.5%), AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (avg score 17891, delta -0.6%), and Intel Core 5 120U (avg score 17898, delta -0.7%). The Core Ultra 7 265KF's closest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (avg score 71797, delta 0.2%), Intel Xeon 6517P (avg score 72350, delta -0.6%), Intel Xeon 6724P (avg score 72396, delta -0.7%), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (avg score 71370, delta 0.8%).

For users selecting between these two, the Core Ultra 7 265KF is the only choice based on raw performance. It leads by 83.9% in multi-core Cinebench R23, by 78.5% in data compression, and by 77.3% in encryption. The Core 7 350 offers integrated graphics, a lower TDP of 15 W versus 125 W, and a mobile socket, but it cannot match the Core Ultra 7 265KF in any benchmark.

The Core Ultra 7 265KF's unlocked multiplier, higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz, and dual-channel memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth provide additional advantages beyond the raw scores. The Core 7 350's single-channel memory and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth limit its performance in memory-intensive tasks. The data supports selecting the Core Ultra 7 265KF for any workload where benchmark performance matters.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF scores 7021 in Cinebench R23 single-core, versus 2046 for the Intel Core 7 350, a delta of -70.9%.

Q: How much faster is the Core Ultra 7 265KF in multi-core Cinebench R20?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265KF scores 20889 versus 5373 for the Core 7 350, a delta of -74.3%.

Q: Do both processors use the same process node?

A: Yes, both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the Core 7 350 is fabricated by Intel and the Core Ultra 7 265KF is fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265KF has 30 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 7 350 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Core 7 350 has a TDP of 15 W, while the Core Ultra 7 265KF has a TDP of 125 W.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Core 7 350 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), while the Core Ultra 7 265KF has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The Core 7 350 has 59.7 GB/s bandwidth with single-channel memory, and the Core Ultra 7 265KF has 102.4 GB/s bandwidth with dual-channel memory.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 350 | Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF |

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

| Cores | 6 | 20 |

| Threads | 6 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake) |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| 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 | 102.4 GB/s |

| 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 |

| Release Date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-10-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $469 | $379 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |