Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every benchmark recorded in the head-to-head comparison. Across 17 tests, the Core Ultra 5 225T takes all 17, while the Core 7 360 records zero wins. The margins, however, vary widely by workload, and that variance reveals the character of each processor.

The largest gap appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 284 against the Core 7 360's 120, a delta of 57.7%. Prime number finding is heavily dependent on integer throughput and memory latency, and the Ultra 5's larger cache and dual-channel memory bus give it a decisive edge. Floating-point math follows closely: the Ultra 5 posts 82,751 versus 44,963, a 45.7% advantage. Integer math shows a 42.5% gap, with scores of 59,543 and 34,238. These three tests, all from the PassMark suite, indicate that the Ultra 5 225T is substantially stronger in raw computational throughput.

The Cinebench results are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra 5 scores 2,214 against 1,374, a 37.9% lead. R20 multicore shows the same 37.9% delta with scores of 9,227 and 5,726. R23 multicore repeats the pattern: 21,971 versus 13,634, again 37.9%. Single-core Cinebench tests are nearly identical in relative terms: R15 single-core gives a 38.1% gap (312 vs 193), R20 single-core 37.9% (1,302 vs 808), and R23 single-core 38.0% (3,101 vs 1,924). The consistency of these deltas across both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads suggests that the Core Ultra 5 225T carries a per-core performance advantage, not merely a core-count advantage.

PassMark's multithread test shows a 38.7% gap (25,358 vs 15,544). Data compression follows with a 38.9% difference (233,998 vs 142,877), and data encryption shows a 39.0% gap (18,289 vs 11,164). Extended instructions produce a 38.3% delta (20,083 vs 12,390), and random string sorting a 38.7% delta (28,774 vs 17,636). Physics simulation shows a 40.9% gap (2,053 vs 1,213).

The narrowest margin is in PassMark single-thread performance. The Core Ultra 5 225T scores 4,348, while the Core 7 360 scores 4,274, a delta of only 1.7%. This is the only benchmark where the two processors are close. It indicates that for light, single-threaded tasks, the Core 7 360 is nearly competitive, despite its much lower boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The 1.7% gap in single-thread performance stands in sharp contrast to the roughly 38% gaps seen elsewhere, which points to memory bandwidth and cache capacity as the primary differentiators in most workloads rather than raw core efficiency.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 5 225T is 30,468, placing it at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 360 averages 18,374, at the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 360 are the Intel Core i3-13100 (average score 18,380, delta 0%), the Intel Core 5 330 (18,345, delta 0.2%), the Intel Core i3-14100 (18,318, delta 0.3%), and the Intel Core 3 305 (18,302, delta 0.4%). For the Core Ultra 5 225T, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-11980HK (30,422, delta 0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS (30,390, delta 0.3%), the Intel Core i5-13600H (30,548, delta -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7736U (30,364, delta 0.3%). The Core 7 360 sits in a cluster of low-end desktop and mobile chips, while the Core Ultra 5 225T sits among older high-end mobile processors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has an average benchmark score of 30,468, while the Intel Core 7 360 has an average of 18,374. The Ultra 5 sits at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, the Core 7 at the 72nd.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: In PassMark single-thread testing, the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 4,348 versus the Core 7 360's 4,274, a delta of 1.7%. This is the smallest gap in the entire head-to-head comparison.

Q: Where does the Core Ultra 5 225T show its biggest advantage?

A: The largest delta is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the Ultra 5 scores 284 against the Core 7's 120, a 57.7% lead. Floating-point math shows a 45.7% gap (82,751 vs 44,963).

Q: What are the nearest competitors to each processor in the database?

A: The Core 7 360 is closest to the Intel Core i3-13100 (delta 0%), the Intel Core 5 330 (delta 0.2%), the Intel Core i3-14100 (delta 0.3%), and the Intel Core 3 305 (delta 0.4%). The Core Ultra 5 225T is closest to the Intel Core i9-11980HK (delta 0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS (delta 0.3%), the Intel Core i5-13600H (delta -0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7736U (delta 0.3%).

Q: Do the Cinebench results differ from the PassMark results?

A: The Cinebench multicore tests consistently show a 37.9% delta across R15, R20, and R23. The PassMark tests show a wider range, from 1.7% in single-thread to 57.7% in prime number finding. The Cinebench suite is more consistent, while PassMark exposes larger workload-specific swings.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225T has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the Core 7 360 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The base clocks differ more substantially: 2.50 GHz for the Ultra 5 versus 1.50 GHz for the Core 7.

The Verdict

The benchmark data selects the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T without qualification. It wins all 17 head-to-head tests, holds a 65.8% higher average benchmark score (30,468 versus 18,374), and sits ten percentile points higher in the overall database ranking. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21,971 versus 13,634 indicates that the Ultra 5 delivers roughly 61% more multi-threaded performance, and the single-core R23 score of 3,101 versus 1,924 shows a 61% advantage in that metric as well.

The Intel Core 7 360 is a 6-core, 6-thread mobile processor on the Wildcat Lake architecture with a 15 W TDP. Its only close result is the PassMark single-thread test, where it trails by just 1.7%. For workloads that are purely single-threaded and lightly threaded, the Core 7 360 is nearly equivalent to the Ultra 5. The data shows no other area of competitiveness.

The Core Ultra 5 225T is a 10-core, 10-thread desktop processor on Arrow Lake with a 65 W TDP. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i9-11980HK and the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS, which places it in a higher performance tier. The Core 7 360, by contrast, sits alongside the Intel Core i3-13100 and the Core i3-14100.

For users whose priority is multi-threaded throughput, the Ultra 5 is the clear selection. For users whose workload is dominated by single-threaded tasks and who require the lower power envelope, the Core 7 360 remains viable, though it still loses the single-thread comparison. The data does not support choosing the Core 7 360 on performance grounds in any tested category.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads. The base clock of the Core 7 is 1.50 GHz, compared to 2.50 GHz for the Ultra 5. Boost clocks are closer: 4.80 GHz for the Core 7, 4.90 GHz for the Ultra 5.

The TDP difference is substantial: 15 W for the Core 7 360, 65 W for the Core Ultra 5 225T. The Core 7 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 7 is marked as a mobile segment processor, the Ultra 5 as desktop.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 5 supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Neither supports ECC memory. PCIe connectivity: the Core 7 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, the Ultra 5 offers Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ in branding and execution units: the Core 7 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, the Ultra 5 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 EU. The multiplier is locked on both. The Core 7 has a launch MSRP of $426; the Ultra 5 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 360 is built on the Wildcat Lake architecture, the Core Ultra 5 225T on Arrow Lake. Both use a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: Intel for the Core 7, TSMC for the Ultra 5. The Ultra 5 has recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm²; the Core 7 has no recorded transistor count or die size.

Cache configurations diverge significantly. The L1 cache is identical at 192 KB per core. The L2 cache differs: 2.5 MB per core on the Core 7, 3 MB per core on the Ultra 5. The L3 cache shows the largest gap: 6 MB shared on the Core 7, 20 MB shared on the Ultra 5. The total L3 difference is more than threefold.

The Core 7 has a single-channel memory bus, the Ultra 5 dual-channel. The Core 7 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, the Ultra 5 only DDR5. The Ultra 5's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is roughly 71% higher than the Core 7's 59.7 GB/s. The PCIe generation and lane count also favor the Ultra 5: Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes.

The Core 7 belongs to the Core 5 generation (Wildcat Lake) and was released in April 2026. The Ultra 5 belongs to the Ultra 5 generation (Arrow Lake) and was released in December 2024. The Core 7's part number is SAE3E; the Ultra 5's part number is unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 225T wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its largest margins are in prime number finding (57.7%), floating-point math (45.7%), and integer math (42.5%). These results indicate workloads involving heavy arithmetic, scientific computing, and number theory benefit most from the Ultra 5's larger cache, dual-channel memory, and higher core count.

The Ultra 5 also wins consistently across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, with deltas between 37.9% and 38.1%. This covers rendering, 3D modeling, and other CPU-bound creative workloads. PassMark data compression, encryption, extended instructions, random string sorting, and physics all show the Ultra 5 ahead by 38.3% to 40.9%. These span database operations, security-focused tasks, and simulation workloads.

The Core 7 360 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its only near-competitive result is PassMark single-thread, where it trails by 1.7%. This means that for a narrow set of lightly threaded, latency-sensitive tasks, the Core 7 approaches parity, but does not achieve it.

The use-case split, therefore, is not between different workloads but between different power and form-factor requirements. The Core 7 360 is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, a single-channel memory bus, and a smaller cache. The Ultra 5 is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP, dual-channel memory, and 20 MB of L3 cache. For mobile deployments where power draw is the primary constraint and performance expectations are modest, the Core 7 360 fits. For desktop deployments where performance is the priority, the Ultra 5 dominates every measured metric. The data does not reveal a single workload where the Core 7 360 outperforms the Ultra 5.