Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has an average benchmark score of 18374, placing it in the 72nd percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL averages 13061, which sits in the 68th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the Core 7 360 in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 7 360 scores 13634 versus 8742 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, a 56% advantage. The gap is consistent across Cinebench R15 (1374 vs 881) and R20 (5726 vs 3671), both also 56% in favor of the Core 7 360.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 3 105UL win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, one test out of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Core Ultra 3 105UL wins PassMark integer math with a score of 41171 versus 34238 for the Core 7 360, a 16.8% margin.

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

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads, meaning it has two more physical cores and four more threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL tops out at 4.20 GHz. Both have the same 1.50 GHz base clock.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 7 360 is limited to single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has a 50% higher theoretical memory bandwidth figure.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 7 360 is built on a 3 nm process node under the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses a 7 nm node from the Meteor Lake-PS family. The process node difference explains why the Core 7 360 achieves its performance with only 6 cores and 6 threads, whereas the Core Ultra 3 105UL relies on 8 cores and 10 threads to deliver its results.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Core 7 360 allocates 192 KB of L1 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, with 6 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has smaller per-core caches at 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2, but compensates with a larger 10 MB shared L3 pool. The larger L3 on the Core Ultra 3 105UL may benefit workloads with repeated data access across cores, though the benchmark data shows the Core 7 360 generally prevails despite the smaller L3.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL carries Arc Xe-LPG 48EU. Neither processor is aimed at heavy gaming duties, but the graphics architecture generation is newer on the Core 7 360.

Memory support and PCIe lanes present a split. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 3 105UL supports DDR5 with capacity depending on the motherboard, uses dual-channel memory at 89.6 GB/s, and offers 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU versus 6 lanes on the Core 7 360. The Core Ultra 3 105UL is classified as a desktop part on Socket 1851, while the Core 7 360 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are lopsided. Across 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Core 7 360 wins 16 and the Core Ultra 3 105UL wins 1. The largest margin comes in PassMark prime number finding, where the Core 7 360 scores 120 versus 44, a 172.7% advantage. That result indicates a massive per-clock efficiency lead for the newer architecture.

Extended instruction throughput shows the same pattern. The Core 7 360 scores 12390 in PassMark extended instructions, beating the Core Ultra 3 105UL's 5634 by 119.9%. Data encryption also favors the Core 7 360 heavily, 11164 versus 6354, a 75.7% gap. These three tests point to the Core 7 360's stronger ALU and cryptographic execution resources.

Cinebench results are uniform. Every multi-core and single-core variant in the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 suites shows the Core 7 360 ahead by 55.6% to 56%. For example, Cinebench R23 single-core scores 1924 for the Core 7 360 and 1234 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. The consistency of these deltas suggests a straightforward clock-for-clock and IPC advantage rather than workload-specific quirks.

PassMark multithread and physics scores continue the trend. The Core 7 360 posts 15544 in multithreaded tests versus 10285, a 51.1% win, and 1213 in physics versus 718, a 68.9% win. Random string sorting goes to the Core 7 360 at 17636 versus 11179, a 57.8% margin. Floating point math favors the Core 7 360 at 44963 versus 30750, a 46.2% lead.

The single exception is PassMark integer math. Here the Core Ultra 3 105UL's 8 cores and 10 threads overcome the Core 7 360's architectural edge. The Core Ultra 3 105UL scores 41171 against 34238, a 16.8% victory. This is the only test where the additional cores and threads translate into a win.

Single-thread performance, measured by PassMark single thread, shows the Core 7 360 at 4274 versus 3382, a 26.4% lead. Data compression also goes to the Core 7 360, 142877 versus 93961, a 52.1% gap.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ: 6 cores and 6 threads on the Core 7 360 versus 8 cores and 10 threads on the Core Ultra 3 105UL. Both run at a 1.50 GHz base clock, but the boost clock favors the Core 7 360 at 4.80 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. Both are listed with a 15 W TDP, though the Core 7 360 is a mobile part and the Core Ultra 3 105UL is a desktop part.

The process node is 3 nm for the Core 7 360 and 7 nm for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. Cache specifications show the Core 7 360 with 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core, plus 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, plus 10 MB shared L3.

Memory bandwidth is a clear differentiator. The Core 7 360 runs single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X at 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 3 105UL runs dual-channel DDR5 at 89.6 GB/s. PCIe lane counts also differ: 6 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU for the Core 7 360, 8 Gen 4 lanes for the Core Ultra 3 105UL.

Sockets and release dates separate the two. The Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516 and launched in April 2026. The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Intel Socket 1851 and launched in April 2024. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 7 360 carries part number SAE3E, and the Core Ultra 3 105UL carries SRN9D.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in every Cinebench test, all PassMark categories except integer math, and the overall average score. It is the clear choice for single-threaded responsiveness, rendering workloads, encryption, compression, physics simulation, and any task that benefits from high per-core efficiency. The 55.6% to 56% margins across all Cinebench variants indicate that the Core 7 360 delivers roughly 56% more rendering throughput regardless of test version.

The Core Ultra 3 105UL wins only in PassMark integer math, where its 8 cores and 10 threads produce a 16.8% advantage. This suggests that highly parallel integer arithmetic, such as certain hashing or sorting algorithms that scale with core count, can favor the Core Ultra 3 105UL. The dual-channel memory interface at 89.6 GB/s also gives it a bandwidth advantage over the Core 7 360's 59.7 GB/s, which could matter for memory-bound workloads even if the benchmark suite does not isolate that factor.

For desktop users, the Core Ultra 3 105UL offers Socket 1851 compatibility and 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, giving it more expansion headroom from the CPU. The Core 7 360 is a mobile BGA part with 6 lanes. The Core Ultra 3 105UL also has a larger 10 MB L3 cache, which may help in workloads with large working sets.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core 7 360 outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL in 16 of 17 benchmark comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 18374 versus 13061. That is a 40.7% higher average score, and the percentile ranking confirms it: 72nd versus 68th among all CPUs.

The Core 7 360's 3 nm process and higher 4.80 GHz boost clock deliver a decisive per-core advantage. It wins Cinebench multi-core by 56% despite having fewer cores and no hyperthreading. It wins single-core by 55.9% to 56%. It wins every PassMark test except integer math. The only scenario where the Core Ultra 3 105UL is competitive is integer-heavy parallel workloads, where its 10 threads and 16.8% edge in PassMark integer math are relevant.

The Core Ultra 3 105UL is not without merit. It has a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, 10 MB of L3 cache, 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and a desktop socket. These features matter for system builders who need memory bandwidth or expansion options. But the benchmark record shows that these advantages do not translate into performance wins in the tested workloads.

For anyone choosing between these two processors based on measured performance, the Intel Core 7 360 is the faster part in nearly every category. The Core Ultra 3 105UL is only preferable for integer math throughput or for a desktop platform with more memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes. The Core 7 360 is the superior computing engine.