Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided comparison. Across all 17 recorded tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF takes the win, leaving the Intel Core 7 360 with zero victories. The margins are substantial in most workloads, though the single-threaded tests reveal a tighter gap.

Starting with Cinebench, the multi-core results show a consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 3693 against 1374 for the Core 7 360, a delta of -62.8% from the Core 7's perspective. The R20 multi-core test repeats this exact margin: 15391 versus 5726, again -62.8%. R23 multi-core follows suit with 36647 against 13634, the same -62.8% delta. This uniformity across all three Cinebench versions indicates the performance gap scales linearly with the workload, not just with the test version.

The single-core Cinebench results tell a similar story but with a slightly different margin. R15 single-core shows 521 versus 193, a -63% delta. R20 single-core delivers 2172 against 808, -62.8%. R23 single-core lands at 5173 versus 1924, -62.8%. The near-identical percentages across single and multi-core tests suggest the Core Ultra 5 245KF holds a consistent architectural advantage per thread, not merely a core-count advantage.

PassMark results widen the gap further in several categories. Data compression shows the Core Ultra 5 245KF at 460123 versus 142877, a -68.9% delta. Find prime numbers is the largest divergence: 416 versus 120, a -71.2% delta. Random string sorting records -68.1% (55206 against 17636). Extended instructions show -67.3% (37912 versus 12390). Data encryption delivers -66.6% (33381 versus 11164). Floating point math sits at -65.8% (131546 versus 44963). Integer math records -65.4% (98854 versus 34238).

The closest contest appears in PassMark single-thread tests. The Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 4715, while the Core 7 360 scores 4274, a delta of only -9.4%. This is the narrowest margin in the entire data set. It indicates that for purely single-threaded integer workloads, the Core 7 360 is competitive, though still behind. The multi-thread PassMark test shows 43110 versus 15544, a -63.9% delta, while physics records 2998 versus 1213, a -59.5% delta, the smallest multi-core margin.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture. The Core Ultra 5 245KF averages 55093, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The Core 7 360 averages 18374, sitting in the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 360 include the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (0% delta), Intel Core 5 330 at 18345 (0.2% delta), Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.3% delta), and Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (0.4% delta). For the Core Ultra 5 245KF, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D at 54762 (0.6% delta), Intel Core 7 253PQE at 55919 (-1.5% delta), Intel Core i9-14900HX at 56004 (-1.6% delta), and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K at 54053 (1.9% delta). The Core 7 360 effectively trades blows with low-end desktop chips, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF competes near flagship territory.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinctly positioned processors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the clear performance leader by every recorded metric. Its 14 cores and 14 threads, paired with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, deliver scores that place it in the 91st percentile. The Core 7 360, with 6 cores and 6 threads plus a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, sits in the 72nd percentile.

For users running multi-threaded applications, the choice is unambiguous. The Core Ultra 5 245KF delivers roughly 2.7 times the multi-core performance in Cinebench R23 (36647 versus 13634). That translates to a -62.8% delta, meaning the Core 7 360 delivers only about 37% of the Core Ultra's multi-core throughput. In PassMark multi-thread, the ratio is similar: 43110 versus 15544, a -63.9% delta.

The single-thread story is less lopsided but still favors the Core Ultra 5 245KF. In PassMark single-thread, the margin narrows to -9.4%, meaning the Core 7 360 achieves roughly 91% of the Core Ultra's single-thread integer score. In Cinebench R23 single-core, however, the gap remains wide at -62.8%, indicating the Core Ultra's advantage is not limited to core count.

The Core 7 360 draws its identity from efficiency and mobility. It is a mobile segment part with a 15 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF is a desktop part with a 125 W TDP. That power envelope difference explains much of the performance gap. The Core 7 360 is not designed to compete with desktop-class throughput; it is built for constrained thermal environments.

From the data alone, the Core Ultra 5 245KF is the appropriate choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, particularly in multi-threaded tasks such as rendering, compression, or physics simulation. The Core 7 360 suits scenarios where the 15 W power draw and mobile form factor are mandatory, accepting a significant performance trade-off.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a 3 nm process node but diverge in nearly every other architectural detail. The Core 7 360 uses Intel as its foundry, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF is fabricated by TSMC. The Core 7 360 carries the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, within the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, indicating no hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads, also without hyper-threading, but with more than double the physical cores. Base clocks also differ: 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360 against 4.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 245KF. Boost clocks reach 4.80 GHz and 5.20 GHz, respectively.

Cache hierarchies diverge in capacity. Both share 192 KB L1 per core. The L2 cache is 2.5 MB per core for the Core 7 360 and 3 MB per core for the Core Ultra 5 245KF. L3 cache shows the largest gap: 6 MB shared for the Core 7 360 versus 24 MB shared for the Core Ultra 5 245KF. That 4x difference in L3 capacity likely contributes to the Core Ultra's advantage in data-heavy workloads like compression and encryption.

Memory support and bus width also differ. The Core 7 360 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 245KF supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, providing 102.4 GB/s. The Core Ultra's memory bandwidth is 1.7 times higher, which matters for multi-threaded workloads that stream data.

PCIe capabilities are not comparable. The Core 7 360 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 5 245KF provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra also includes a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², figures not recorded for the Core 7 360.

Integrated graphics separate them further. The Core 7 360 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A. The Core 7 360 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851.

The multiplier is unlocked on the Core Ultra 5 245KF, allowing overclocking. The Core 7 360 has a locked multiplier. ECC memory is not supported on either processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 36647 versus 13634 for the Core 7 360, a -62.8% delta.

Q: How close are they in single-threaded performance?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 4715 versus 4274 for the Core 7 360, a -9.4% delta. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra leads by -62.8% (5173 versus 1924).

Q: What is the core count difference?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: Both use a 3 nm process node, but the Core 7 360 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF is fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which processor supports more memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245KF, with a dual-channel memory bus delivering 102.4 GB/s. The Core 7 360 uses a single-channel bus at 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 245KF have integrated graphics?

A: No. Its integrated graphics are listed as N/A. The Core 7 360 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins in every recorded benchmark category. The largest margins appear in prime number finding (-71.2%), data compression (-68.9%), random string sorting (-68.1%), and extended instructions (-67.3%). These workloads benefit from the Core Ultra's higher core count, larger L3 cache, and dual-channel memory bandwidth.

The smallest margin for the Core Ultra is in PassMark single-thread (-9.4%). This indicates the Core 7 360's per-core integer performance is relatively close, though still behind. The physics test shows a -59.5% delta, the smallest multi-core gap, suggesting the Core 7 360 handles that workload relatively better than others.

The Core 7 360 has no benchmark wins. Its advantage lies outside raw performance: a 15 W TDP, integrated Xe3 graphics, LPDDR5X memory support, and a mobile socket. Its launch MSRP is $426. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has a launch MSRP of $294.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 7 360 | Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 14 |

| Threads | 6 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Architecture | Not recorded | Arrow Lake |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 (2 Xe) | N/A |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-10-23 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SAE3E | SRQCY |

| Percentile | 72 | 91 |