Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 360 compare to the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL in terms of overall benchmark standing?

A: The Core 7 360 holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL sits at the 50th percentile. The Core 7 360 also has a recorded average benchmark score of 18,374, whereas the Core Ultra 5 125HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

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

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores and 18 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, which is higher than the 4.50 GHz boost clock of the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL. The Core 7 360 also has a higher base clock at 1.50 GHz compared to 1.20 GHz.

Q: How do the cache sizes differ between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has a larger L1 cache at 192 KB per core and a larger L2 cache at 2.5 MB per core, but it has a much smaller L3 cache at 6 MB shared. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL has an 18 MB shared L3 cache, which is three times larger.

Q: What are the differences in memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL supports dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and has 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The Intel Core 7 360 supports single-channel memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s and has 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

Q: What are the respective release dates and market segments?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 was released on 2026-04-15 and is targeted at the Mobile segment. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL was released on 2024-04-07 and is targeted at the Desktop segment.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from distinct architectural lineages within Intel's lineup. The Intel Core 7 360 is based on the Wildcat Lake codename, belonging to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation, and is manufactured on a 3 nm process node. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture, with the Meteor Lake-PS codename, from the Ultra 5 (Meteor Lake-PS) generation, and is built on a 7 nm process node. Both are produced by Intel, but the difference in process node suggests a generational gap in manufacturing technology.

The core topology differs significantly. The Core 7 360 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor, indicating no hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 5 125HL is a 14-core, 18-thread processor, which implies a mix of performance and efficiency cores with hyperthreading on some cores, though the exact core configuration is not specified. This disparity in core and thread counts is the most fundamental architectural distinction.

Cache hierarchy also diverges. The Core 7 360 features a larger per-core L1 cache at 192 KB and L2 cache at 2.5 MB, but a smaller shared L3 cache at 6 MB. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has a smaller per-core L1 cache at 112 KB and L2 cache at 2 MB, but a substantially larger shared L3 cache at 18 MB. The larger L3 cache on the Core Ultra 5 125HL can benefit workloads that require frequent data sharing across cores.

Memory architecture differs as well. The Core 7 360 uses single-channel memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 125HL also offers more PCIe lanes: 8 Gen 4 lanes compared to 6 Gen 4 lanes on the Core 7 360. The integrated graphics differ too: the Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, whereas the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 112 execution units.

The socket types are incompatible. The Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket. The platform positioning also differs: the Core 7 360 is explicitly a Mobile segment part, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL is a Desktop segment part. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has a higher TDP of 45, compared to 15 for the Core 7 360, reflecting its desktop orientation.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split between the two processors based on workload and platform. The Intel Core 7 360, with its higher clock speeds (1.50 GHz base, 4.80 GHz boost) and smaller core count, is positioned for scenarios where single-threaded performance and power efficiency are prioritized. Its 72nd percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 18,374 place it near the Intel Core i3-13100 (18,380, 0% delta), the Intel Core 5 330 (18,345, 0.2% delta), the Intel Core i3-14100 (18,318, 0.3% delta), and the Intel Core 3 305 (18,302, 0.4% delta). This suggests it competes with established low-core-count desktop parts in overall performance.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL, by contrast, offers 14 cores and 18 threads, dual-channel memory, a larger L3 cache, and higher memory bandwidth. However, the database contains no benchmark scores for this processor, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. Its 50th percentile ranking is based on specifications rather than measured performance. For multi-threaded workloads that can utilize its core count and memory bandwidth, the Core Ultra 5 125HL has a structural advantage, but the lack of measured data means its real-world performance cannot be confirmed.

Users on a mobile platform with a focus on responsiveness and efficiency should consider the Core 7 360. Users building a desktop system with workloads that scale across many cores and benefit from high memory bandwidth should consider the Core Ultra 5 125HL, though its performance remains unverified in the database. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has a launch MSRP of $325.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. The base clock of the Core 7 360 is 1.50 GHz versus 1.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. The boost clock of the Core 7 360 is 4.80 GHz versus 4.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. The TDP is 15 for the Core 7 360 and 45 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

The cache configuration differs in all levels. The Core 7 360 has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Core 7 360, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL supports DDR5, depending on the motherboard. The memory bus is single-channel for the Core 7 360 and dual-channel for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s for the Core 7 360 and 89.6 GB/s for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. PCIe lanes are 6 Gen 4 for the Core 7 360 and 8 Gen 4 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

The integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) for the Core 7 360, Arc Xe-LPG 112EU for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. The socket is Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 7 360 and Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. The process node is 3 nm for the Core 7 360 and 7 nm for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. The market segment is Mobile for the Core 7 360 and Desktop for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Release dates differ: 2026-04-15 for the Core 7 360, 2024-04-07 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. The part numbers are SAE3E for the Core 7 360 and SRN9D for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Core 7 360 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has an empty benchmarks array, and the head-to-head benchmarks field is also empty. Consequently, direct comparisons of measured performance are not possible from the recorded data.

The Core 7 360, however, has a full set of benchmark scores. In Cinebench R23, it scores 13,634 in multi-core and 1,924 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5,726 multi-core and 808 single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 1,374 multi-core and 193 single-core. PassMark results include a multi-thread score of 15,544 and a single-thread score of 4,274. Other PassMark scores include data compression at 142,877, data encryption at 11,164, extended instructions at 12,390, find prime numbers at 120, floating point math at 44,963, integer math at 34,238, physics at 1,213, and random string sorting at 17,636.

The average benchmark score for the Core 7 360 is 18,374, which places it in the 72nd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-13100 with an average score of 18,380 and a delta of 0%, the Intel Core 5 330 with 18,345 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i3-14100 with 18,318 and a delta of 0.3%, and the Intel Core 3 305 with 18,302 and a delta of 0.4%. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that the Core 7 360 delivers performance almost identical to these competing parts in aggregate. The Core 7 360 trails the Core i3-13100 by only 6 points in average score, a negligible margin.

For the Core Ultra 5 125HL, no such data exists. With an average benchmark score of 0 and no recorded tests, its performance cannot be quantified or compared directly. Its 50th percentile ranking is derived from its specifications, not measured results.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in scenarios that stress single-threaded performance and power efficiency. Its higher base and boost clocks, along with a smaller core count, suggest it can deliver faster responses in lightly threaded applications such as typical desktop productivity, web browsing, and legacy software that relies on a few high-frequency cores. The 3 nm process node also indicates a more advanced manufacturing process, which typically correlates with better power efficiency per operation. The Core 7 360 is a mobile part with a TDP of 15, making it suitable for devices where thermal and power constraints are significant.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL wins in scenarios that leverage many cores and high memory throughput. Its 14 cores and 18 threads provide a structural advantage for multi-threaded workloads such as video rendering, compilation, scientific computing, and server-style tasks that scale with core count. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the single-channel 59.7 GB/s of the Core 7 360, gives it an edge in memory-intensive operations. The 18 MB shared L3 cache, three times larger than the Core 7 360's 6 MB, can improve performance in workloads with large working sets that require frequent cache hits. The Core Ultra 5 125HL also offers more PCIe lanes (8 versus 6), which can support additional expansion devices or faster data transfer to peripherals.

The integrated graphics on the Core Ultra 5 125HL, Arc Xe-LPG with 112 execution units, are substantially more robust than the Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores on the Core 7 360. This suggests the Core Ultra 5 125HL can handle more demanding graphics tasks without a discrete GPU, while the Core 7 360 is limited to basic display output. The Core Ultra 5 125HL is a desktop part with a TDP of 45, allowing for higher sustained performance in a desktop chassis with adequate cooling.

The measured data only supports the Core 7 360's performance claims. Its benchmark scores and percentile ranking are recorded, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has no measured results. For users who rely on verified performance, the Core 7 360 is the only option with confirmed data. For users who need the parallel processing capabilities of 14 cores and the memory bandwidth of dual-channel architecture, the Core Ultra 5 125HL offers the specifications, but its actual performance remains unmeasured in the database.