Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core 7 360. The largest single margin comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 7 265H scores 335 versus 120, a 64.2% advantage. That is the widest gap recorded in any test between these two processors.

Multi-core rendering workloads show a consistent pattern of dominance. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra 7 265H scores 2989 against 1374, a 54% lead. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 12131 versus 5726, a 52.8% advantage. The Cinebench R23 multicore gap narrows to 31.6%, with scores of 19940 and 13634 respectively, but the winner remains unchanged.

The data compression test follows the same trend. PassMark data compression shows 334711 for the Ultra 7 265H against 142877, a 57.3% improvement. Data encryption posts 26005 versus 11164, a 57.1% edge. Extended instructions deliver 26805 versus 12390, a 53.8% margin.

Floating point math is another decisive area. The Ultra 7 265H records 109123 against 44963, a 58.8% advantage. Integer math shows 85479 versus 34238, a 59.9% lead. Multithread performance in PassMark reaches 34027 versus 15544, a 54.3% gap. Physics simulation scores 2497 versus 1213, a 51.4% margin. Random string sorting comes in at 40742 versus 17636, a 56.7% difference.

Single-core tests reveal a much tighter competition. Cinebench R23 singlecore gives the Ultra 7 265H a 7.5% edge, with 2080 versus 1924. PassMark single thread shows only a 1.4% gap, 4334 versus 4274. Cinebench R15 singlecore is the closest relative margin in the multi-core group at 37.1%, but the absolute scores of 307 versus 193 still favor the Ultra 7 265H decisively.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The Core 7 360 averages 18374, while the Core Ultra 7 265H averages 41621. The Ultra 7 265H sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 7 360. The nearest rival to the Core 7 360 is the Intel Core i3-13100 with an average score of 18380, a 0% delta. The nearest rival to the Ultra 7 265H is the Intel Core 7 251TE at 41650, a 0.1% delta, putting the Ultra 7 265H in a performance class occupied by desktop-class processors.

The data shows no test where the Core 7 360 comes out ahead. Every recorded benchmark, from rendering to encryption to math workloads, points to the same conclusion: the Ultra 7 265H is the faster processor across the board.

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is faster in every measured workload. The smallest margin, 1.4% in PassMark single thread, still favors the Ultra 7 265H. The largest margins, exceeding 60% in prime number finding, reflect the substantial core and thread advantage held by the Ultra 7 265H.

The Core 7 360 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor. The Ultra 7 265H offers 16 cores and 16 threads. That difference explains most of the multi-threaded gaps. The single-core results, however, show that the Ultra 7 265H also carries a higher boost clock, 5.30 GHz versus 4.80 GHz, which contributes to its lead even in lightly threaded tests.

The average benchmark score of 41621 for the Ultra 7 265H places it near the Intel Core i7-14650HX, which scores 41576, and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41376. The Core 7 360, with an average of 18374, sits alongside the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 and the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318. The performance tier difference is substantial.

The data supports a straightforward selection: the Ultra 7 265H is the superior processor for any workload where performance matters. The Core 7 360 belongs to a lower performance band, with an average score less than half that of the Ultra 7 265H. The 88th percentile ranking for the Ultra 7 265H versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 7 360 quantifies the gap in overall CPU capability.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H averages 41621, while the Intel Core 7 360 averages 18374.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: In PassMark single thread, the Ultra 7 265H scores 4334 versus 4274, a 1.4% edge. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the gap is 7.5%, with 2080 versus 1924.

Q: Does the Core 7 360 win any benchmark?

A: No. The Ultra 7 265H wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 7 265H leads by 64.2% (335 versus 120).

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Core 7 360 matches the Intel Core i3-13100 with a 0% delta, while the Ultra 7 265H is 0.1% behind the Intel Core 7 251TE and 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14650HX.

Q: Which processor has higher multi-threaded performance?

A: The Ultra 7 265H leads in PassMark multithread with 34027 versus 15544, a 54.3% advantage, and in Cinebench R23 multicore with 19940 versus 13634, a 31.6% lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Core 7 360 uses 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 7 265H uses 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360 and 2.20 GHz for the Ultra 7 265H. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 5.30 GHz respectively.

Thermal design power differs as well. The Core 7 360 is rated at 15 W, while the Ultra 7 265H is rated at 28 W. The sockets are not interchangeable: the Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, and the Ultra 7 265H uses Intel BGA 2049.

Memory support shows a major split. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the Core 7 360 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 265H uses a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported only on the Ultra 7 265H.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 7 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Ultra 7 265H provides Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ: the Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 7 265H uses Arc Graphics 140T.

The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426. The Ultra 7 265H has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 360 is built on a 3 nm process node by Intel, under the codename Wildcat Lake. Its generation is listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). The Ultra 7 265H is also built on a 3 nm node, but the foundry is TSMC, and it uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the codename Arrow Lake-H. Its generation is Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H).

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both processors have 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache is 2.5 MB per core for the Core 7 360 and 3 MB per core for the Ultra 7 265H. The shared L3 cache is 6 MB for the Core 7 360 and 24 MB for the Ultra 7 265H. The larger L3 cache on the Ultra 7 265H aligns with its higher core count and memory bandwidth.

The Core 7 360 belongs to the Wildcat Lake family, while the Ultra 7 265H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. The market segment for both is mobile. Both processors are listed as Active in production status. The release dates differ: the Ultra 7 265H was released in 2025-01-12, and the Core 7 360 in 2026-04-15. The part numbers are SAE3E for the Core 7 360 and SRQAQ for the Ultra 7 265H.

The architectural differences point to two distinct design goals. The Core 7 360 is a low-power, low-core-count processor with a 15 W TDP and single-channel memory. The Ultra 7 265H is a higher-power part with more cores, more cache, dual-channel memory, and PCIe Gen 5 support. The foundry difference, Intel versus TSMC, is notable even though both use a 3 nm process.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows no benchmark wins for the Core 7 360. Every recorded test favors the Ultra 7 265H. The use-case split, therefore, is defined by the magnitude of the margins rather than by any reversal of results.

The Ultra 7 265H is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads. The PassMark multithread score of 34027 versus 15544 represents a 54.3% advantage. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 19940 versus 13634 gives a 31.6% edge. The Cinebench R20 and R15 multicore tests show even larger gaps at 52.8% and 54% respectively. Any workload that scales across cores, such as rendering, video encoding, or scientific computation, will see major gains from the Ultra 7 265H.

The Ultra 7 265H also leads in memory-intensive tasks. Data compression shows a 57.3% advantage, and data encryption shows a 57.1% edge. These workloads benefit from the dual-channel memory bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the single-channel 59.7 GB/s on the Core 7 360. The larger 24 MB L3 cache likely contributes as well.

Math-heavy workloads strongly favor the Ultra 7 265H. Floating point math scores 109123 versus 44963, a 58.8% lead. Integer math scores 85479 versus 34238, a 59.9% lead. Extended instructions show a 53.8% gap. Prime number finding, which is highly sensitive to core count and clock speed, shows the largest margin at 64.2%.

The single-core results are the only area where the Core 7 360 approaches parity. PassMark single thread shows just a 1.4% gap, and Cinebench R23 singlecore shows a 7.5% gap. For lightly threaded tasks such as basic office work or web browsing, the difference between these two processors would be barely perceptible. However, the Ultra 7 265H still wins these tests.

The Core 7 360 has one structural advantage: its 15 W TDP. The data does not include battery life or thermal measurements, but the thermal envelope is half that of the Ultra 7 265H. For fanless or ultra-portable designs where power draw is the primary constraint, the Core 7 360 may be the more practical fit. The performance data, however, offers no scenario where the Core 7 360 outperforms the Ultra 7 265H in raw compute.

The production status of both processors is Active. The Ultra 7 265H, released earlier in 2025-01-12, has a longer availability history. The Core 7 360, released in 2026-04-15, is the newer part but occupies a lower performance tier. The average benchmark score of 18374 for the Core 7 360 places it near entry-level desktop processors like the Intel Core i3-13100, while the Ultra 7 265H at 41621 competes with desktop-class parts such as the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X.

For users who prioritize compute performance, the Ultra 7 265H is the answer. For users who prioritize the lowest power envelope and have minimal performance requirements, the Core 7 360 remains a viable part, but the benchmark record gives it no performance wins.