Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a one-sided comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core 7 360 recording zero wins. The most significant margins appear in multi-threaded workloads, where the Core Ultra 5 245 consistently outperforms by roughly 58 to 67 percent.

In Cinebench testing, the Core Ultra 5 245 posts a multicore score of 3318 in R15 versus 1374 for the Core 7 360, a delta of negative 58.6 percent relative to the Core 7 360. The R20 multicore test shows 13828 against 5726, and R23 multicore shows 32924 against 13634, both with the same negative 58.6 percent delta. Single-core Cinebench results follow a similar pattern: R15 single-core records 468 versus 193, R20 single-core records 1952 versus 808, and R23 single-core records 4648 versus 1924, each again at negative 58.6 percent.

PassMark tests reveal even larger gaps in some areas. The data compression test shows the Core Ultra 5 245 scoring 400942 against 142877, a delta of negative 64.4 percent. Integer math scores 91187 versus 34238, a negative 62.5 percent delta. Floating point math scores 120548 versus 44963, a negative 62.7 percent delta. The find prime numbers test shows the widest relative gap: 365 versus 120, a negative 67.1 percent delta.

The closest contest appears in PassMark single-thread testing. The Core Ultra 5 245 scores 4394 while the Core 7 360 scores 4274, a delta of only negative 2.7 percent. This indicates that in lightly threaded, short-duration workloads, the two processors are nearly equivalent, with the Core Ultra 5 245 holding only a modest edge.

Other PassMark results reinforce the Core Ultra 5 245's dominance. Data encryption scores 30236 versus 11164, a negative 63.1 percent delta. Extended instructions score 33304 versus 12390, a negative 62.8 percent delta. Multithread score 38706 versus 15544, a negative 59.8 percent delta. Physics score 2569 versus 1213, a negative 52.8 percent delta, the smallest multi-threaded gap recorded. Random string sorting scores 49140 versus 17636, a negative 64.1 percent delta.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 5 245 is 48995, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 360 has an average benchmark score of 18374, placing it in the 72nd percentile. The Core Ultra 5 245's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196 (negative 0.4 percent delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (negative 0.5 percent delta), the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H at 48698 (positive 0.6 percent delta), and the Intel Core i5-14600K at 48618 (positive 0.8 percent delta). The Core 7 360's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (zero percent delta), the Intel Core 5 330 at 18345 (positive 0.2 percent delta), the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (positive 0.3 percent delta), and the Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (positive 0.4 percent delta). These figures confirm that the Core 7 360 competes at the level of low-end desktop i3 parts, while the Core Ultra 5 245 sits among much stronger desktop and server processors.

Architecture Differences

The two processors target fundamentally different market segments, and the recorded specifications reflect that split. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the "Core 5 (Wildcat Lake)" generation. It is a mobile processor with 6 cores and 6 threads, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 uses the Arrow Lake codename and the Arrow Lake-S architecture, belongs to the "Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake)" generation, and is a desktop processor with 14 cores and 14 threads. It is also fabricated on a 3 nm process, but at TSMC, and carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

The core count difference is substantial. The Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts. The base clock for the Core 7 360 is 1.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 245 runs a base clock of 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 245 therefore has both a higher idle frequency and a higher maximum frequency.

Cache configurations differ as well. Both processors use a 192 KB L1 cache per core. The L2 cache on the Core 7 360 is 2.5 MB per core, while the Core Ultra 5 245 has 3 MB per core. The shared L3 cache on the Core 7 360 is 6 MB, compared to 24 MB on the Core Ultra 5 245. That 4x difference in L3 capacity likely contributes to the large performance gap in multi-threaded workloads.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 245 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s. The Core 7 360 does not support ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 245 does. PCIe connectivity differs: the Core 7 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 245 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 245 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core 7 360 uses an Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Core Ultra 5 245 uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 245 has a TDP of 65 watts. The production status for both is Active. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426, while the Core Ultra 5 245 has a launch MSRP of $270. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The release date for the Core 7 360 is 2026-04-15, while the Core Ultra 5 245 was released on 2025-01-06.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 wins every multi-threaded test. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 32924 versus 13634, a negative 58.6 percent delta. PassMark multithread shows 38706 versus 15544, a negative 59.8 percent delta.

Q: Is the single-thread performance gap as large as the multi-thread gap?

A: No. In PassMark single-thread testing, the Core Ultra 5 245 scores 4394 versus 4274, a negative 2.7 percent delta. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 4648 versus 1924, a negative 58.6 percent delta, but that test appears more sensitive to the clock and architecture differences.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor provide?

A: The Core 7 360 has a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Core Ultra 5 245 has a dual-channel memory bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth and supports DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245 supports ECC memory. The Core 7 360 does not.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads. Neither processor has hyper-threading.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 watts, indicating a low-power mobile design. The Core Ultra 5 245 has a TDP of 65 watts, indicating a desktop-class part.

Specification Differences

The database records the following differences between the two processors:

• Cores: Core 7 360 has 6, Core Ultra 5 245 has 14
• Threads: Core 7 360 has 6, Core Ultra 5 245 has 14
• Base Clock: Core 7 360 runs at 1.50 GHz, Core Ultra 5 245 at 3.50 GHz
• Boost Clock: Core 7 360 boosts to 4.80 GHz, Core Ultra 5 245 to 5.10 GHz
• TDP: Core 7 360 rated at 15 watts, Core Ultra 5 245 at 65 watts
• Socket: Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, Core Ultra 5 245 uses Intel Socket 1851
• Codename: Core 7 360 is Wildcat Lake, Core Ultra 5 245 is Arrow Lake-S
• Architecture: Core 7 360 has no listed architecture, Core Ultra 5 245 uses Arrow Lake
• Foundry: Core 7 360 fabricated at Intel, Core Ultra 5 245 at TSMC
• Transistors: Core 7 360 has no listed count, Core Ultra 5 245 has 17,800 million
• Die Size: Core 7 360 has no listed size, Core Ultra 5 245 is 243 mm²
• L2 Cache: Core 7 360 has 2.5 MB per core, Core Ultra 5 245 has 3 MB per core
• L3 Cache: Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared, Core Ultra 5 245 has 24 MB shared
• Memory Support: Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Core Ultra 5 245 supports DDR5 only
• Memory Bus: Core 7 360 is single-channel, Core Ultra 5 245 is dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: Core 7 360 delivers 59.7 GB/s, Core Ultra 5 245 delivers 102.4 GB/s
• ECC Memory: Core 7 360 does not support it, Core Ultra 5 245 supports it
• PCIe: Core 7 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes, Core Ultra 5 245 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes
• Integrated Graphics: Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), Core Ultra 5 245 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU
• Market Segment: Core 7 360 is Mobile, Core Ultra 5 245 is Desktop
• Launch MSRP: Core 7 360 at $426, Core Ultra 5 245 at $270
• Release Date: Core 7 360 released 2026-04-15, Core Ultra 5 245 released 2025-01-06

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is the stronger processor in every measured test. It wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from negative 2.7 percent in PassMark single-thread to negative 67.1 percent in PassMark find prime numbers. The average benchmark score of 48995 places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 360's average score of 18374 places it in the 72nd percentile.

The Core Ultra 5 245's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, both of which score slightly higher in average benchmark terms. The Core 7 360's nearest rivals are all Intel Core i3 and Core 3 parts, indicating that its performance class is entry-level desktop, despite its mobile designation and higher launch MSRP.

The Core 7 360 is a 15-watt mobile processor with 6 cores, a single-channel memory bus, and 6 MB of L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245 is a 65-watt desktop processor with 14 cores, a dual-channel memory bus, and 24 MB of L3 cache. Those structural differences fully explain the performance gap. The Core 7 360 cannot match the Core Ultra 5 245 in any compute-heavy scenario, and it also has a higher launch MSRP of $426 versus $270.

For anyone choosing between these two parts based solely on the data, the Core Ultra 5 245 delivers superior performance across Cinebench and PassMark tests, supports ECC memory, provides more PCIe lanes at a newer generation, and offers more than double the L3 cache. The Core 7 360 offers lower power consumption and LPDDR5X memory support, but its benchmark results place it far behind.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 wins in every benchmark category recorded. Its largest margins appear in PassMark find prime numbers (negative 67.1 percent delta), data compression (negative 64.4 percent delta), random string sorting (negative 64.1 percent delta), and data encryption (negative 63.1 percent delta). These tests reflect heavy integer and memory-bound workloads, where the 14-core design, 24 MB L3 cache, and dual-channel memory bandwidth provide substantial advantages.

The Core Ultra 5 245 also dominates multi-threaded rendering workloads. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests all show negative 58.6 percent deltas. The Core Ultra 5 245 scores 32924 in R23 multicore, more than double the Core 7 360's 13634. PassMark multithread and physics tests show deltas of negative 59.8 percent and negative 52.8 percent, respectively.

The Intel Core 7 360 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its closest result comes in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4274 versus 4394, a delta of only negative 2.7 percent. In that narrow context, the Core 7 360 nearly matches the Core Ultra 5 245, suggesting that for very short, single-threaded bursts, the mobile part can hold its own. However, that is the only area where the gap is small. The Core 7 360 also supports LPDDR5X memory and carries a 15-watt TDP, making it suitable for battery-conscious mobile designs, but the data does not show any performance advantage from those features.

The use-case split is therefore clear. The Core Ultra 5 245 is the choice for desktop builds that prioritize compute performance, memory bandwidth, ECC support, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. The Core 7 360 is a low-power mobile processor that trades performance for efficiency, but it does not outperform the Core Ultra 5 245 in any measured metric. The recorded data offers no scenario where the Core 7 360 comes out ahead.