Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an overwhelmingly one-sided comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with the Intel Core 7 360 taking only 2. The margin of victory for the Ultra 5 is substantial across nearly every workload category.

Starting with multi-threaded rendering, the Ultra 5 338H leads by a wide margin in Cinebench R15 multicore, scoring 2504 against the Core 7 360's 1374, a delta of -45.1% favoring the Ultra 5. The gap narrows somewhat in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Ultra 5 scores 16331 versus 13634, a -16.5% difference. This pattern suggests the Ultra 5's advantage grows under shorter, more intensive bursts of load, while longer sustained workloads bring the Core 7 360 relatively closer, though still behind.

Single-core performance tells a different story depending on the benchmark suite. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the Ultra 5 scores 2044 versus the Core 7 360's 1924, a -5.9% delta. Cinebench R20 singlecore shows a larger gap: 1441 versus 808, a -43.9% difference. PassMark single-thread, however, flips the result. The Core 7 360 scores 4274, edging out the Ultra 5's 4180 by 2.2%. This is the only meaningful single-thread win for the Core 7 360, and it indicates that the two processors are nearly identical in raw single-core capability, with the Core 7 360 holding a slight edge in that specific metric.

The specialty workloads reveal the Ultra 5's dominance in compute-heavy tasks. PassMark find prime numbers shows the Ultra 5 at 304 versus 120, a -60.5% delta, the largest gap in the entire dataset. PassMark physics follows with 2697 versus 1213, a -55% difference. PassMark data compression favors the Ultra 5 at 276539 versus 142877, a -48.3% delta. Data encryption shows 21367 versus 11164, a -47.8% delta. Extended instructions produce 23906 versus 12390, a -48.2% delta. Floating point math delivers 84067 versus 44963, a -46.5% delta. Integer math reaches 64934 versus 34238, a -47.3% delta. Random string sorting yields 34082 versus 17636, a -48.3% delta.

The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy. The Ultra 5 338H records an average score of 33989, while the Core 7 360 sits at 18374. The Ultra 5's percentile ranking among all CPUs is 84, compared to the Core 7 360's 72. The nearest rivals list for the Ultra 5 includes the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H at 34083 (-0.3% delta), the Intel Core i7-12800HX at 33875 (0.3% delta), and the AMD EPYC 4244P at 34220 (-0.7% delta). The Core 7 360's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (0% delta), the Intel Core 5 330 at 18345 (0.2% delta), and the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.3% delta). These rival placements show the Core 7 360 competing with older quad-core parts, while the Ultra 5 sits alongside higher-end mobile H-series chips.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in core configuration and cache hierarchy. The Core 7 360 uses 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 5 338H doubles that to 12 cores and 12 threads. Neither supports simultaneous multithreading, so core count directly equals thread count. The base clock of the Core 7 360 is 1.50 GHz, lower than the Ultra 5's 1.90 GHz. Boost clocks are closer: 4.80 GHz for the Core 7 360 versus 4.70 GHz for the Ultra 5. The higher base clock plus more than double the cores explains most of the multi-threaded performance gap.

Cache allocations differ significantly. Both processors provide 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache, however, shows a major split. The Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared L3, while the Ultra 5 338H carries 18 MB shared L3. That 12 MB difference directly supports the Ultra 5's larger working set and explains its stronger performance in data compression and encryption workloads, which benefit from larger cache residency.

The process node is identical at 3 nm, with Intel as the foundry for both. The codenames differ: Wildcat Lake for the Core 7 360, Panther Lake for the Ultra 5 338H. The Ultra 5 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, while the Core 7 360 falls under the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. Memory support diverges as well. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 5 338H supports only LPDDR5X but uses a dual-channel bus with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, more than double the throughput. This memory bandwidth advantage likely contributes heavily to the Ultra 5's wins in memory-sensitive tests like random string sorting and data compression.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The Core 7 360 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 5 338H uses Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: the Core 7 360 ships with Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), while the Ultra 5 338H ships with Arc B370. Both use Intel BGA sockets, but different variants: BGA 1516 for the Core 7 360, BGA 2540 for the Ultra 5 338H. The TDP figures are 15 W for the Core 7 360 and 25 W for the Ultra 5 338H, indicating the Ultra 5 is designed for higher sustained power delivery.

Release dates and market positioning differ. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426 and a release date of 2026-04-15. The Ultra 5 338H has no recorded launch MSRP and released earlier on 2026-01-04. Both are marked as Active in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier. ECC memory is not supported on either part.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear separation of roles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the superior processor for multi-threaded and compute-intensive workloads. Its 12 cores, 18 MB L3 cache, and 136.5 GB/s dual-channel memory bandwidth deliver a consistent 45% to 60% lead over the Core 7 360 across most benchmarks. The Cinebench R23 multicore result, where the Ultra 5 leads by only -16.5%, is the closest multi-threaded finish, but even that remains a decisive win.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins only in PassMark single-thread by 2.2%. That single result, combined with its 4.80 GHz boost clock, indicates the Core 7 360 is optimized for lightly threaded, latency-sensitive tasks. Its 15 W TDP and 6-core configuration make it a lower-power part, though the database does not include direct power consumption measurements.

The percentile rankings confirm the broader picture. The Ultra 5 338H sits at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 360 sits at the 72nd. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 5 include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and Intel Core i7-12800HX, both established high-performance mobile parts. The Core 7 360's nearest rivals are the Core i3-13100 and Core i3-14100, which are budget-oriented desktop parts. This positioning shows the Ultra 5 operating in a higher performance class entirely.

For users prioritizing rendering, physics simulation, data compression, or encryption, the Ultra 5 338H is the clear choice based on the recorded benchmarks. For users whose workload is predominantly single-threaded and who need a smaller physical footprint with lower base clock, the Core 7 360 offers a slight edge in PassMark single-thread but trails in every Cinebench single-core test. The data does not support the Core 7 360 as a general-purpose winner; it is a niche part for specific single-thread scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the largest benchmark gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 338H scores 304 versus the Core 7 360's 120, a -60.5% delta favoring the Ultra 5.

Q: Does the Core 7 360 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Core 7 360 wins PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread, both with a score of 4274 versus the Ultra 5's 4180, a 2.2% delta.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared L3 cache, while the Ultra 5 338H has 18 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: The Core 7 360 supports 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus, while the Ultra 5 338H supports 136.5 GB/s over a dual-channel bus.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 W, and the Ultra 5 338H has a TDP of 25 W.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in every multi-threaded rendering test. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 2504 versus 1374, R20 multicore shows 10213 versus 5726, and R23 multicore shows 16331 versus 13634. The Ultra 5 also dominates all PassMark compute workloads: data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting. These are workloads that scale with core count, cache size, and memory bandwidth, all of which favor the Ultra 5.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in PassMark single-thread with 4274 versus 4180. This is a narrow victory, but it indicates the Core 7 360's 4.80 GHz boost clock provides a slight edge in workloads that depend on a single thread's responsiveness. Notably, the Core 7 360 does not win any Cinebench single-core test; the Ultra 5 leads R15 singlecore (305 versus 193), R20 singlecore (1441 versus 808), and R23 singlecore (2044 versus 1924). The Core 7 360's single-thread win is isolated to the PassMark metric.

For integrated graphics, the Ultra 5 338H ships with Arc B370, while the Core 7 360 ships with Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no quantitative comparison is possible, but the architectural difference suggests the Ultra 5 is positioned for more capable graphics output. The Ultra 5 also supports PCIe Gen 5, while the Core 7 360 is limited to Gen 4, which may affect peripheral and storage throughput in future systems.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 360 | Intel Core Ultra 5 338H |

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

| Series | None | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 6 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc B370 |

| Release Date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $426 | None |

| Part Number | SAE3E | SA4REQ9EW |

The two processors share the same 3 nm process node, 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and lack ECC support. Both are locked multipliers and are in Active production. The differences in core count, L3 cache, memory bus width, and PCIe generation define the performance separation observed in the benchmarks.