Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 268V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear split between two very different processor designs. The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V wins 13 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core 7 360 takes 4 wins. The margin of victory, however, tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The largest single win for the Core Ultra 7 268V comes in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where it scores 293 against the Core 7 360's 193, a 34.1% advantage. This is the widest gap in any benchmark between the two chips. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core, with the Ultra 7 268V scoring 1616 versus 1374, a 15% lead. Cinebench R20 shows a consistent 16.9% advantage for the Ultra 7 268V in both single-core (972 vs 808) and multi-core (6887 vs 5726) runs.

The PassMark suite reinforces the Ultra 7 268V's dominance in compute-heavy workloads. The prime number search test shows a 37.5% gap (192 vs 120), the largest percentage difference in the entire comparison. Floating point math shows a 22% lead (57628 vs 44963), integer math shows 19.8% (42669 vs 34238), and extended instructions show 19.1% (15323 vs 12390). Data compression favors the Ultra 7 268V by 21.3% (181443 vs 142877), data encryption by 19% (13779 vs 11164), and random string sorting by 21.3% (22416 vs 17636).

The Core 7 360 does secure one notable multi-core victory. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 13634 against the Ultra 7 268V's 10653, a 28% advantage. This is the second-largest percentage gap in either direction and the only Cinebench multi-core test where the Core 7 360 comes out ahead. The Core 7 360 also wins the PassMark single-thread test by 5.5% (4274 vs 4051), and in Cinebench R23 single-core the two chips are effectively tied, with the Core 7 360 ahead by just 0.2% (1924 vs 1921).

The pattern suggests workload-dependent behavior. The Ultra 7 268V dominates in the R15 and R20 Cinebench generations, while the Core 7 360 claims the R23 multi-core result. PassMark single-threaded performance favors the Core 7 360, but every PassMark multi-threaded metric favors the Ultra 7 268V.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 7 268V is the stronger choice for sustained multi-threaded compute. Its PassMark multi-thread score of 19297 is 19.4% above the Core 7 360's 15544. The physics test shows a 25% lead (1617 vs 1213). All six PassMark compute sub-tests, compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime numbers, floating point, and integer math, favor the Ultra 7 268V. This makes it the better fit for data processing, scientific calculations, and content creation tasks that scale across cores.

The Core 7 360 wins in one specific Cinebench R23 multi-core scenario, but its strongest consistent advantage is single-thread performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 4274 beats the Ultra 7 268V's 4051 by 5.5%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the two are essentially identical, but the Core 7 360 still edges ahead. The older Cinebench R15 single-core test is the exception, where the Ultra 7 268V leads by a massive 34.1%.

For older Cinebench versions, the Ultra 7 268V is the clear winner. The R15 and R20 suites, which are often used for shorter render tests, show consistent 15% to 17% advantages for the Ultra 7 268V. The R23 multi-core result flips this, suggesting that the Core 7 360 handles the longer R23 workload more efficiently despite losing in shorter render tests.

The data indicates that users running modern Cinebench R23 multi-core renders would see better results from the Core 7 360, while those using PassMark suites, R15, or R20 would prefer the Ultra 7 268V. Single-threaded applications, such as legacy productivity software or lightly threaded games, show a slight edge for the Core 7 360 based on the PassMark single-thread result.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families with distinct characteristics. The Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 7 268V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, and is fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts for both.

Cache hierarchies show both shared and divergent elements. Both chips have 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache differs substantially: the Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared, while the Core Ultra 7 268V has 12 MB shared, double the capacity.

Clock speeds favor the Ultra 7 268V on paper. Its base clock is 2.20 GHz with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Core 7 360 runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The TDP rating is close, with the Core 7 360 at 15 watts and the Ultra 7 268V at 17 watts.

Memory architecture differs notably. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 268V supports memory that depends on the motherboard, uses a dual-channel bus, and has no recorded bandwidth figure. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 7 360 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 268V uses Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are another differentiator. The Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Ultra 7 268V uses the Arc 140V. Both are mobile processors with active production status. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426; the Ultra 7 268V has no recorded launch MSRP.

Socket types differ as well. The Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Ultra 7 268V uses Intel BGA 2833. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates are separated by roughly 19 months, with the Ultra 7 268V releasing on 2024-09-23 and the Core 7 360 on 2026-04-15.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither chip supports simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Why does the Core 7 360 win Cinebench R23 multi-core despite having fewer cores?

A: The Core 7 360 scores 13634 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 10653 for the Ultra 7 268V, a 28% advantage. This occurs despite the Ultra 7 268V having more cores and winning every other multi-core benchmark. The data suggests the Core 7 360 handles the R23 workload more efficiently, though the recorded results do not specify the underlying cause.

Q: How do single-threaded scores compare?

A: The Core 7 360 leads in PassMark single-thread with 4274 versus 4051, a 5.5% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 7 360 scores 1924 against 1921, a 0.2% lead. The Ultra 7 268V wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 34.1% (293 vs 193) and Cinebench R20 single-core by 16.9% (972 vs 808).

Q: What are the cache differences?

A: Both chips have 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core. The L3 cache differs: the Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared, while the Ultra 7 268V has 12 MB shared.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Ultra 7 268V has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Core 7 360 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Base clocks are 2.20 GHz for the Ultra 7 268V and 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360.

Q: How do the memory buses differ?

A: The Core 7 360 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 268V uses a dual-channel bus, with memory support depending on the motherboard and no recorded bandwidth figure.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to different strengths for each processor. The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V is the more consistent performer across the majority of tests. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, including all PassMark multi-threaded sub-tests, both older Cinebench versions, and the PassMark physics test. Its 74th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, compared to the Core 7 360's 72nd percentile, and its higher average benchmark score of 20897 against 18374, indicate broader overall capability.

The Intel Core 7 360 is the pick for users specifically running Cinebench R23 multi-core workloads, where its 28% advantage is substantial. Its PassMark single-thread lead of 5.5% also makes it slightly better for lightly threaded applications. The 6 MB L3 cache and single-channel memory bus are modest, but the 3 nm Intel process and Wildcat Lake architecture deliver competitive results where they matter most.

For general compute, the Ultra 7 268V's 8 cores, 12 MB L3 cache, dual-channel memory, and higher clock speeds produce better results in the majority of recorded tests. The Core 7 360 offers a lower launch MSRP of $426 and a more recent release date, but the data does not show a consistent performance advantage outside of specific workloads. The nearest rival comparisons reinforce this: the Core 7 360 sits within 0.4% of the Core i3-13100, Core 5 330, Core i3-14100, and Core 3 305, while the Ultra 7 268V sits within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE, Core i5-12600T, AMD EPYC 7J13, and Core Ultra 5 125U.

Users prioritizing multi-threaded performance across a wide range of tests should choose the Ultra 7 268V. Users whose primary workload is Cinebench R23 multi-core or who need the slight single-thread edge from the PassMark test should choose the Core 7 360. The data does not support a single winner across all scenarios.