AMD Ryzen 5 3501U vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive sweep for the Intel Core 7 360 across all eleven recorded comparisons. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U does not claim a single head-to-head victory, with the Intel part winning every workload category by substantial margins.

The largest gap appears in prime number finding, where the Intel Core 7 360 scores 120 versus the AMD's 21, a difference of 82.5 percent. This workload is highly sensitive to single-thread efficiency and branch handling, and the Intel architecture is clearly operating at a different performance tier. Extended instruction throughput shows a similar pattern: Intel scores 12390 against AMD's 3274, a 73.6 percent deficit for the Ryzen part. Floating point math follows closely, with Intel posting 44963 versus AMD's 12707, meaning the Ryzen trails by 71.7 percent.

Memory encryption performance, a measure of AES and similar cryptographic workloads, favors Intel by exactly 50 percent, with scores of 11164 and 5580 respectively. Single-thread performance repeats that exact 50 percent delta: Intel's 4274 against AMD's 2136. The multithread score tells a more sobering story for the AMD chip, as Intel's 15544 beats the Ryzen's 7071 by 54.5 percent. Physics simulation, which often reflects both compute and memory subsystem behavior, sees Intel ahead by 60.2 percent (1213 versus 483).

The smaller deltas are still decisive. Integer math shows Intel at 34238 versus AMD's 26321, a 23.1 percent advantage. Random string sorting, a test of pointer-chasing and data movement, favors Intel by 41 percent (17636 versus 10414). Data compression, a routine workload for laptop users, has Intel at 142877 against AMD's 87380, a 38.8 percent edge.

The average benchmark scores in the database corroborate this hierarchy. The Intel Core 7 360 carries an average score of 18374, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U sits at 14320. The nearest rival data places the Ryzen in a cluster with the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 (14336, a 0.1 percent difference), AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277, 0.3 percent), Intel Core 7 160UL (14232, 0.6 percent), and Intel Core i5-10400F (14185, 1 percent). The Intel Core 7 360, by contrast, sits alongside the Intel Core i3-13100 (18380, 0 percent), Intel Core 5 330 (18345, 0.2 percent), Intel Core i3-14100 (18318, 0.3 percent), and Intel Core 3 305 (18302, 0.4 percent). The absolute score separation between the two parts is roughly 4,054 points, or about 28 percent relative to the AMD chip's own average.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U is a 4-core, 4-thread part based on the Picasso codename and the Zen+ architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It integrates 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and the Core 5 generation, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It offers 6 cores and 6 threads.

Clock behavior diverges sharply. The AMD part has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel part starts at a lower 1.50 GHz base but boosts to 4.80 GHz, a full 1.10 GHz higher than the AMD's maximum. This high boost ceiling is a primary driver of the Intel chip's single-thread dominance. Both parts carry a 15 W TDP, but the process and microarchitecture differences translate that power budget into very different performance envelopes.

Cache hierarchies also differ structurally. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 7 360 delivers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 allocation on the Intel part is notable, as it reduces reliance on the shared L3 for frequently accessed data. The per-core L1 difference also contributes to the single-thread and integer math results.

Memory support marks another significant split. The AMD part uses DDR4 with a dual-channel memory bus and a peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but uses a single-channel memory bus with a peak bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. Despite the single-channel configuration, the newer memory standard provides 21.3 GB/s more theoretical bandwidth, which helps workloads like data compression and physics simulation. Neither part supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U provides PCIe Gen 3, while the Intel Core 7 360 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes available to the CPU. This affects peripheral bandwidth for storage and expansion, though the benchmark results in this database do not directly measure PCIe throughput.

Integrated graphics distinguish the two as well. The AMD chip includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database does not contain graphics benchmarks for either part, so no performance comparison is possible from the recorded data. Both processors are mobile parts, use non-unlockable multipliers, and remain in active production. The AMD part has a release date of May 31, 2026, while the Intel part was released on April 15, 2026. The Intel Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents no ambiguity. The Intel Core 7 360 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U in every benchmark category tracked by the database. The smallest margin is 23.1 percent in integer math, the largest is 82.5 percent in prime number finding. The Intel part's average score of 18374 places it 28 percent above the AMD's 14320.

For workloads dominated by single-thread performance, such as interactive use, web rendering, and lightly threaded applications, the Intel part's 4.80 GHz boost clock and 50 percent single-thread score advantage make the choice straightforward. For multithreaded tasks, the Intel chip's 54.5 percent lead in the multithread score and its additional two cores provide a similarly clear result.

The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U is not without merit in context. Its average score of 14320 places it in the 69th percentile of all CPUs in the database, and it sits within 1 percent of several well-known desktop parts like the Intel Core i5-10400F. It does, however, occupy a different performance class entirely from the Intel Core 7 360, which ranks in the 72nd percentile and matches the Intel Core i3-13100 within 0 percent.

The data suggests that the AMD part can handle routine productivity workloads, but the Intel Core 7 360 delivers roughly 1.3 times the average performance, and in specific workloads like extended instructions, more than 3.7 times the score. The 15 W TDP on both parts means the Intel chip achieves its advantages within the same power envelope. For any user comparing these two processors on the basis of benchmark results, the Intel Core 7 360 is the clear selection.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 scores 4274 in PassMark single-thread, exactly double the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U's 2136, a 50 percent advantage.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multithreaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 scores 15544 in PassMark multithread, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U scores 7071, giving Intel a 54.5 percent lead.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What memory technologies do these processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each part?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U boosts to 3.70 GHz. The Intel Core 7 360 boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U uses a 12 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core 7 360 uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 360 wins every benchmark category in the database, so the use-case split is defined by the degree of its advantage rather than any reversal of fortunes.

Prime number finding is the Intel part's most dominant territory, with an 82.5 percent margin. This workload benefits from the Intel chip's high boost clock and efficient branch prediction. Extended instruction throughput shows a 73.6 percent advantage for Intel, indicating that SIMD-heavy code such as multimedia encoding or scientific calculations strongly favors the Intel architecture. Floating point math delivers a 71.7 percent edge, reinforcing the same conclusion for numerically intensive tasks.

The Intel Core 7 360 also wins decisively in physics simulation by 60.2 percent, which reflects both compute throughput and memory bandwidth. The 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth on the Intel part, enabled by DDR5 and LPDDR5X support, contributes to this result. Multithread performance sees Intel ahead by 54.5 percent, a function of its two additional cores and higher per-core efficiency.

Data encryption favors Intel by exactly 50 percent, as does single-thread performance. These workloads are common in everyday mobile use, from VPN traffic to application responsiveness. Random string sorting shows a 41 percent Intel advantage, indicating better data movement and cache handling. Data compression, relevant for file archiving and backup tasks, favors Intel by 38.8 percent. Even the smallest gap, integer math at 23.1 percent, leaves Intel clearly ahead.

The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U does not produce a single benchmark win, but its performance profile relative to its own nearest rivals shows it is not an outlier in its class. It sits within 1 percent of the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546, AMD Ryzen 3 7320C, Intel Core 7 160UL, and Intel Core i5-10400F. For workloads matched to those processors, such as basic office tasks, light browsing, and legacy DDR4 platforms, the AMD part remains competitive within its segment. The database does not record any benchmark where the AMD chip outperforms the Intel Core 7 360, so any use-case preference must rest on external factors such as platform compatibility, integrated graphics needs, or memory type requirements, none of which are measured in these benchmark results.