Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core i9-14900KS Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core i9-14900KS across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Core 7 360 wins zero tests, while the i9-14900KS takes all 17. The margins, however, vary dramatically by workload type.

In Cinebench testing, the i9-14900KS delivers consistently dominant results. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-14900KS scores 50,995 against the Core 7 360's 13,634, a delta of -73.3%. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 7,199 versus 1,924, again -73.3%. Cinebench R15 and R20 show identical deltas of -73.3% for both multi-core and single-core runs. The i9-14900KS posts 5,140 in R15 multi-core versus 1,374, and 725 in R15 single-core versus 193. In R20, the scores are 21,417 versus 5,726 multi-core and 3,023 versus 808 single-core. The consistency of the -73.3% delta across all six Cinebench tests indicates a uniform scaling factor between the two processors under this benchmark suite, likely reflecting the core count and thread count disparity.

PassMark integer math shows the widest gap. The i9-14900KS scores 212,644 against 34,238, a delta of -83.9%. Data compression is nearly as lopsided at -82.2%, with scores of 803,368 versus 142,877. Random string sorting shows -80.4% (89,789 versus 17,636). Data encryption delivers -76.6% (47,717 versus 11,164). Multithread performance lands at -74.1% (60,012 versus 15,544). Extended instructions come in at -72.8% (45,524 versus 12,390). Floating point math shows -70.8% (153,975 versus 44,963). Physics testing shows -64.1% (3,381 versus 1,213).

The narrowest margin appears in PassMark single-thread testing. The i9-14900KS scores 4,815 versus the Core 7 360's 4,274, a delta of only -11.2%. This is the closest result in the entire comparison. The single-thread result suggests that per-core efficiency is far more comparable than the multi-core results imply. The find prime numbers test also shows a relatively smaller gap at -50.8%, with scores of 244 versus 120.

Where Each One Wins

The data presents an unambiguous split: the i9-14900KS wins everywhere, but the scale of its advantage tells a useful story about workload types.

For heavily parallel workloads, the i9-14900KS is in a different performance class. Integer math, data compression, and multithread tests all show deltas between -74.1% and -83.9%. These workloads scale with core count and thread count, and the i9-14900KS brings 24 cores and 32 threads against the Core 7 360's 6 cores and 6 threads. The Cinebench multi-core results, all at -73.3%, reinforce this pattern.

For lightly threaded or single-thread workloads, the gap narrows considerably. The PassMark single-thread test shows only -11.2%. The find prime numbers test, at -50.8%, sits between the single-thread and multi-thread extremes. This test likely has mixed scaling characteristics. The Core 7 360's Wildcat Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process, appears to deliver competitive per-core throughput despite far fewer cores.

The physics test, at -64.1%, falls between the extremes. Physics simulations often benefit from both single-thread performance and moderate multi-threading. The data suggests the i9-14900KS wins comfortably but not by the enormous margins seen in pure throughput tests.

The Core 7 360's percentile ranking of 72 across all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18,374, places it near the Intel Core i3-13100 (18,380, 0% delta), Intel Core 5 330 (18,345, 0.2% delta), Intel Core i3-14100 (18,318, 0.3% delta), and Intel Core 3 305 (18,302, 0.4% delta). These are its nearest rivals. The i9-14900KS, by contrast, sits at the 96th percentile with an average score of 81,127, its nearest rivals being the Intel Xeon w5-3535X (81,115, 0% delta), AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX (81,103, 0% delta), AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 (80,762, 0.5% delta), and Intel Xeon 638 (80,723, 0.5% delta). The 72nd percentile for the Core 7 360 versus the 96th percentile for the i9-14900KS reflects a processor aimed at a different performance tier entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The i9-14900KS uses the Raptor Lake-R codename with the Raptor Lake architecture, part of the Core 14th Gen series and the Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The Core 7 360 is built on a 3 nm process node, while the i9-14900KS uses a 10 nm node. The Core 7 360 lists no die size in the database, while the i9-14900KS measures 257 mm². Both are fabricated by Intel.

Core and thread configurations diverge sharply. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading or simultaneous multi-threading. The i9-14900KS has 24 cores and 32 threads, indicating a hybrid configuration with performance and efficiency cores. The base clock of the Core 7 360 is 1.50 GHz, versus 3.20 GHz for the i9-14900KS. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 6.20 GHz respectively.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 360 lists 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i9-14900KS lists 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The total L3 advantage for the i9-14900KS is substantial, though the per-core L1 and L2 figures are higher on the Core 7 360.

The integrated graphics differ: the Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the i9-14900KS uses UHD Graphics 770. The Core 7 360 targets the mobile market segment with an Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the i9-14900KS targets desktop with an Intel Socket 1700. The multiplier is unlocked on the i9-14900KS but locked on the Core 7 360. The production status for both is Active.

The Core 7 360's release date is 2026-04-15, while the i9-14900KS launched on 2024-03-13. The part numbers are SAE3E and SRN7R respectively.

Specification Differences

The database records several specification fields where these two processors diverge. The Core 7 360 lists 6 cores and 6 threads; the i9-14900KS lists 24 cores and 32 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 3.20 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz versus 6.20 GHz. Thermal design power is 15 watts for the Core 7 360 and 150 watts for the i9-14900KS.

Memory support differs: the Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the i9-14900KS supports DDR4 and DDR5. The memory bus is single-channel on the Core 7 360 and dual-channel on the i9-14900KS. The Core 7 360 records a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s; the i9-14900KS has no bandwidth figure in the database. ECC memory is not supported on the Core 7 360 but is supported on the i9-14900KS.

PCI Express configuration varies: the Core 7 360 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the i9-14900KS uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The market segment is Mobile for the Core 7 360 and Desktop for the i9-14900KS. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 360 is $426, and for the i9-14900KS it is $689.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS has an average benchmark score of 81,127, while the Intel Core 7 360 has an average benchmark score of 18,374.

Q: How do the processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The i9-14900KS scores 50,995 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, compared to 13,634 for the Core 7 360, a delta of -73.3%.

Q: What is the closest benchmark result between the two?

A: The PassMark single-thread test shows the smallest gap, with the i9-14900KS scoring 4,815 against the Core 7 360's 4,274, a delta of -11.2%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The i9-14900KS supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 360 does not.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The i9-14900KS has 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: How do the thermal design power figures compare?

A: The Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 watts, while the i9-14900KS has a TDP of 150 watts.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The Core 7 360 is built on a 3 nm process node, while the i9-14900KS uses a 10 nm process node.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the performance hierarchy clear. The i9-14900KS wins every benchmark in the comparison, with the largest margins in multi-threaded throughput tests and the smallest margin in single-thread performance. Its 96th percentile ranking across all CPUs, average benchmark score of 81,127, 24 cores, 32 threads, 6.20 GHz boost clock, 36 MB of shared L3 cache, and dual-channel memory bus position it as a high-end desktop processor. The unlocked multiplier and ECC memory support further differentiate it for enthusiast and workstation use.

The Core 7 360 occupies a different performance tier. Its 72nd percentile ranking, average score of 18,374, 6 cores, 6 threads, 4.80 GHz boost clock, 6 MB of shared L3 cache, and single-channel memory bus align it more closely with the Intel Core i3-13100, Core 5 330, Core i3-14100, and Core 3 305, all of which sit within 0.4% of its average score. The 3 nm process node, mobile socket, 15 watt TDP, and Intel Xe3 Graphics indicate a design focused on power efficiency and portability rather than absolute performance.

The data suggests two different intended use cases. The i9-14900KS, with its 150 watt TDP, desktop socket, Gen 5 PCIe with 16 lanes, and 32 threads, is suited for heavily threaded desktop workloads. The Core 7 360, with its 15 watt TDP, mobile BGA socket, Gen 4 PCIe with 6 lanes, and 6 threads, is built for power-constrained mobile environments where the single-thread performance gap of -11.2% is more relevant than the multi-thread gaps exceeding -70%. Buyers should select based on workload scaling: the i9-14900KS for parallel tasks, the Core 7 360 for efficiency-oriented mobile use.