Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison
Intel Core 7 360
Core Ultra 7 258V
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
FAQ
Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V has the higher average benchmark score at 20454, compared to 18374 for the Intel Core 7 360. This places the Core Ultra 7 258V in the 74th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 360 sits in the 72nd percentile.
Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?
A: The Intel Core 7 360 wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 13634, which is 32.4% ahead of the Core Ultra 7 258V's 10301. This is the largest margin of victory for the Core 7 360 across all head-to-head benchmarks.
Q: Which chip wins the majority of the recorded benchmark tests?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 7 360 wins only 4 tests: Cinebench R23 multi-core, Cinebench R23 single-core, and the two PassMark single-thread tests.
Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences between the two?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V uses a dual-channel memory bus with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core 7 360 uses a single-channel bus at 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 258V also supports only LPDDR5X memory, whereas the Core 7 360 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.
Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?
A: Both processors share the same boost clock of 4.80 GHz. However, the base clocks differ: the Core Ultra 7 258V runs at 2.20 GHz, while the Core 7 360 runs at 1.50 GHz.
Q: What is the cache configuration difference?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 6 MB shared L3 cache on the Intel Core 7 360. Both chips have identical L1 cache at 192 KB per core and L2 cache at 2.5 MB per core.
The Verdict
The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is the stronger all-around performer. Its average benchmark score of 20454 is 11.3% higher than the Core 7 360's 18374. The Core Ultra 7 258V also holds a higher percentile ranking at 74 versus 72, placing it among the better-performing mobile processors in the database.
Users who prioritize sustained multi-threaded rendering in Cinebench R23 should look at the Intel Core 7 360, which leads that specific workload by 32.4%. The Core 7 360 also edges out the Core Ultra 7 258V in single-threaded PassMark tests, with a 6.4% advantage. However, the Core Ultra 7 258V dominates the broader benchmark suite, including every Cinebench R15 and R20 test, all PassMark math and compression workloads, and the multi-threaded PassMark test.
The Core Ultra 7 258V also offers a more capable integrated graphics solution with Arc 140V, a dual-channel memory interface, and double the L3 cache. The Core 7 360 counters with a lower TDP of 15 W versus 17 W, a different socket, and support for both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory types. For most mobile workloads, the recorded data favors the Core Ultra 7 258V, while the Core 7 360 appeals specifically to those running Cinebench R23 workloads or seeking a lower power envelope.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V wins the majority of the head-to-head tests, often by substantial margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 285 against 193 for the Core 7 360, a 32.3% advantage. The Core Ultra 7 258V also leads Cinebench R15 multi-core with 1596.5 versus 1374, a 13.9% margin. Cinebench R20 results show the same pattern: the Core Ultra 7 258V takes both single-core and multi-core, scoring 951 versus 808 (15% ahead) and 6739 versus 5726 (15% ahead), respectively.
PassMark workloads heavily favor the Core Ultra 7 258V. The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 185 versus 120, a 35.1% lead. Floating point math also shows a wide gap: 57372 versus 44963, or 21.6% ahead. Integer math follows at 42889 versus 34238, a 20.2% margin. Data compression sees the Core Ultra 7 258V at 176686 versus 142877, a 19.1% advantage, while data encryption shows 13534 versus 11164, a 17.5% lead. Extended instructions, physics, multi-threaded performance, and random string sorting all favor the Core Ultra 7 258V by margins between 15.8% and 22.5%.
The Intel Core 7 360 wins only four tests, but two of those are notable. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers its best result: 13634 versus 10301, a 32.4% lead. This is the single largest delta in either direction across all head-to-head comparisons. Cinebench R23 single-core also goes to the Core 7 360, with 1924 versus 1872, a 2.8% margin. In PassMark single-thread testing, the Core 7 360 scores 4274 versus 4018, a 6.4% advantage. The same result appears in the PassMark singlethread test, which repeats the identical scores.
The pattern is clear: the Core Ultra 7 258V excels in older Cinebench versions and across nearly all PassMark workloads, while the Core 7 360 takes the newer Cinebench R23 tests and the PassMark single-thread metric.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V uses 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 258V has a base clock of 2.20 GHz, higher than the Core 7 360's 1.50 GHz. Both chips reach the same boost clock of 4.80 GHz.
TDP differs slightly: the Core 7 360 is rated at 15 W, the Core Ultra 7 258V at 17 W. The sockets are incompatible, with the Core 7 360 using Intel BGA 1516 and the Core Ultra 7 258V using Intel BGA 2833. The Core 7 360 has no multiplier unlock, and neither does the Core Ultra 7 258V.
Memory support diverges as well. The Core 7 360 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X. The memory bus width differs: the Core 7 360 is single-channel, the Core Ultra 7 258V is dual-channel. Memory bandwidth reflects this, with the Core Ultra 7 258V delivering 136.5 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s for the Core 7 360. Neither processor supports ECC memory.
PCIe capabilities also differ. The Core 7 360 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 258V offers Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ substantially: the Core 7 360 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 7 258V includes Arc 140V.
Release dates and pricing are not aligned. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426 and a release date of 2026-04-15. The Core Ultra 7 258V has no recorded launch MSRP and released on 2024-09-23. The production status for both is Active.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V uses the Lunar Lake architecture and carries the Core Ultra Series 2 branding. The generation field for the Core 7 360 reads "Core 5 (Wildcat Lake)", whereas the Core Ultra 7 258V reads "Ultra 7 (Lunar Lake)".
Both processors are built on a 3 nm process node, but they use different foundries. The Core 7 360 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 258V is fabricated by TSMC. This foundry difference represents a significant architectural divergence between the two mobile chips.
Cache architecture shares the same per-core layout: both have 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache, however, differs by a factor of two. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 7 360 has 6 MB.
The core counts also reflect different architectural approaches. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses 8 cores with 8 threads, a configuration that pairs with its dual-channel memory subsystem. The Core 7 360 uses 6 cores with 6 threads and a single-channel memory bus. These differences explain much of the performance gap in memory-heavy workloads and multi-threaded PassMark tests.
The integrated GPU architectures differ as well. The Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses Arc 140V. This represents a generational and performance tier difference in the graphics component of each chip, though the database records no direct graphics benchmarks for either processor.
The PCIe generation difference (Gen 4 on the Core 7 360 versus Gen 5 on the Core Ultra 7 258V) and the socket incompatibility reinforce that these are architecturally distinct platforms despite sharing the same 3 nm process node and identical boost clocks.