Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 256V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 7 360 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V reveals a clear split: the Core Ultra 7 256V dominates the Cinebench R15 and R20 suites, while the Core 7 360 takes the newer R23 workloads and one PassMark thread test. Overall, the Core Ultra 7 256V wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, with the Core 7 360 claiming four wins.

Starting with the older Cinebench releases, the Core Ultra 7 256V leads by substantial margins. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 1583.5 against 1374, a 13.2% advantage. The single-core R15 gap is even larger: 285.5 versus 193, a 32.4% delta. Cinebench R20 shows a 17.7% lead for the Core Ultra 7 256V in both multicore (6958 versus 5726) and single-core (982 versus 808). These results indicate that in legacy rendering workloads, the Lunar Lake part holds a decisive edge.

The picture flips in Cinebench R23. The Core 7 360 scores 13634 in multicore, which is 31.1% ahead of the Core Ultra 7 256V's 10399. In single-core R23, the Core 7 360 leads by a narrower 2.5% margin, posting 1924 versus 1877.5. This reversal suggests that the newer Cinebench version responds differently to the architectural characteristics of each chip, with the Wildcat Lake design pulling ahead in sustained multi-threaded rendering.

PassMark tests heavily favor the Core Ultra 7 256V across almost every category. Data compression shows 184985 versus 142877, a 22.8% lead. Data encryption delivers 13998 against 11164, a 20.2% gap. Extended instructions score 15643 versus 12390, a 20.8% difference. Floating point math hits 58576 versus 44963, a 23.2% advantage. Integer math produces 43358 versus 34238, a 21% lead. The multithread test shows 19530 versus 15544, a 20.4% gap. Physics simulation posts 1595 versus 1213, a 23.9% delta. Random string sorting completes at 22481 versus 17636, a 21.6% difference.

The only PassMark win for the Core 7 360 comes in the single-thread test, where it scores 4274 versus 4029, a 6.1% advantage. Both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries record identical results for each processor, confirming this outcome. This single-thread PassMark win is notable because the Core Ultra 7 256V wins the equivalent Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests, suggesting workload-specific behavior.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall positioning. The Core 7 360 averages 18374, while the Core Ultra 7 256V averages 21112. In percentile terms against all CPUs, the Core Ultra 7 256V ranks at the 75th percentile, three points higher than the Core 7 360's 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 360 include the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (0% delta), the Intel Core 5 330 at 18345 (0.2% delta), the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.3% delta), and the Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (0.4% delta). The Core Ultra 7 256V sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U at 21133 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G at 21088 (0.1% delta), the Intel Core i3-1220P at 21066 (0.2% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U at 21174 (0.3% delta).

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different Intel families with distinct design philosophies. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is listed under the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Lunar Lake architecture, and carries the Ultra 7 (Lunar Lake) generation label. Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ: Intel fabricates the Core 7 360, while TSMC produces the Core Ultra 7 256V.

Core counts diverge significantly. The Core 7 360 provides 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading. The Core Ultra 7 256V offers 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks also differ: the Core 7 360 runs at 1.50 GHz, while the Core Ultra 7 256V starts at 2.20 GHz. Both reach the same 4.80 GHz boost clock. Thermal design power is close, with the Core 7 360 rated at 15 W and the Core Ultra 7 256V at 17 W.

Cache hierarchies share the same L1 and L2 per-core allocations: 192 KB per core for L1 and 2.5 MB per core for L2. The L3 cache differs substantially, with the Core 7 360 featuring 6 MB shared and the Core Ultra 7 256V doubling that to 12 MB shared. This larger L3 cache likely contributes to the Core Ultra 7 256V's strong PassMark performance in data-heavy workloads.

Memory support shows a clear divergence. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus with a measured bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 256V lists memory support as dependent on the motherboard and uses a dual-channel memory bus; the database does not record a bandwidth figure for it. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 7 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 256V offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics separate the two as well. The Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 7 256V integrates Arc 140V graphics, a higher-tier solution that the benchmark data does not directly evaluate but which represents a different class of iGPU. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Sockets differ, with the Core 7 360 using Intel BGA 1516 and the Core Ultra 7 256V using Intel BGA 2833. Release dates place the Core Ultra 7 256V first, launching on 2024-09-23, while the Core 7 360 arrives later on 2026-04-15. The Core 7 360 has a recorded launch MSRP of $426; the Core Ultra 7 256V has no launch MSRP in the database. Both are active production parts for the mobile market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 7 360 wins the remaining four: Cinebench R23 multicore, Cinebench R23 single-core, and both PassMark single-thread entries.

Q: How large is the Core Ultra 7 256V's advantage in Cinebench R15 multicore?

A: The Core Ultra 7 256V scores 1583.5 versus 1374 for the Core 7 360, a 13.2% lead. The single-core R15 gap is larger at 32.4%, with scores of 285.5 and 193 respectively.

Q: Where does the Core 7 360 beat the Core Ultra 7 256V?

A: The Core 7 360 leads in Cinebench R23 multicore by 31.1% (13634 versus 10399) and in Cinebench R23 single-core by 2.5% (1924 versus 1877.5). It also wins the PassMark single-thread test with 4274 versus 4029, a 6.1% margin.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Core Ultra 7 256V averages 21112, while the Core 7 360 averages 18374. This places the Core Ultra 7 256V at the 75th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 7 360.

Q: Do the two processors share the same process node?

A: Yes, both use a 3 nm process node. However, the foundry differs: Intel manufactures the Core 7 360, while TSMC produces the Core Ultra 7 256V.

Q: How do the L3 cache sizes compare?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 7 256V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core.

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

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 256V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 360 | Intel Core Ultra 7 256V |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 6 | 8 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Architecture | Wildcat Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 7 (Lunar Lake) |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | Depends on motherboard |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | Not recorded |

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

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc 140V |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $426 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SAE3E | SRPMPSRPMZ |

The boost clocks match at 4.80 GHz, and both processors use 3 nm manufacturing, but nearly every other specification separates them. The Core Ultra 7 256V carries two additional cores and threads, a higher base clock, a larger L3 cache, and a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 7 360 counters with a lower TDP, a documented memory bandwidth figure, and a later release date. The Core 7 360 is the only one with a launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V is the stronger choice for legacy Cinebench rendering and the bulk of PassMark workloads. Its 13 head-to-head wins cover data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread performance, physics simulation, and random string sorting. The margins are consistent, mostly in the 20% to 24% range, with the prime number test showing the widest gap at 37.5%. This processor also holds a 32.4% single-core lead in Cinebench R15, indicating strong per-thread performance in that specific benchmark. The dual-channel memory bus and 12 MB L3 cache provide structural advantages for memory-sensitive tasks.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in Cinebench R23, which is the most recent Cinebench version in the database. Its multicore score of 13634 is 31.1% ahead of the Core Ultra 7 256V, a substantial reversal from the R20 results where it trailed by 17.7%. The R23 single-core win is narrower at 2.5%, but it still puts the Core 7 360 ahead. The PassMark single-thread test also goes to the Core 7 360 with a 6.1% margin, showing that its peak single-thread performance can exceed the Core Ultra 7 256V in certain workloads despite the base clock disadvantage. The 4.80 GHz boost clock matches between the two, so the difference comes down to architecture rather than frequency.

For users prioritizing PassMark-heavy applications such as encryption, compression, or mathematical computation, the Core Ultra 7 256V delivers broadly superior results. For users running Cinebench R23 or relying on single-thread PassMark performance, the Core 7 360 provides the better outcome. The average benchmark scores favor the Core Ultra 7 256V at 21112 versus 18374, but the Core 7 360's R23 dominance shows that benchmark selection materially changes the verdict. The 72nd percentile for the Core 7 360 and 75th percentile for the Core Ultra 7 256V reflect the overall average gap, with the Core 7 360's nearest rivals being the Intel Core i3-13100 and Intel Core 5 330, while the Core Ultra 7 256V sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U and Intel Core Ultra 7 155U.