Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Intel Core 7 360 and Intel Core Ultra 7 366H are two mobile processors that sit in different performance classes despite sharing the same 3 nm process node and Intel foundry. The benchmark data shows a decisive split: the Core Ultra 7 366H wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Core 7 360 wins only 2, both in the same single-thread PassMark test. The average benchmark score difference is substantial, with the Ultra 7 366H recording an average of 41263 compared to 18374 for the Core 7 360. This places the Ultra 7 366H in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 360 sits at the 72nd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 366H dominates every multi-core and throughput-oriented workload in the dataset. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28477 against 13634 for the Core 7 360, a 52.1% advantage. The same pattern repeats across PassMark tests: data compression (327455 vs 142877), integer math (83695 vs 34238), and floating-point math (103615 vs 44963). The Ultra 7 366H also leads in extended instructions (26901 vs 12390) and encryption (25845 vs 11164), with deltas ranging from 53.9% to 63.2%. The largest margin is in the find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 7 366H scores 326 versus 120, a 63.2% gap.

The Core 7 360 wins only the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 4274 against 4043 for the Ultra 7 366H, a 5.7% margin. This is a narrow but consistent result, appearing in both the `passmark_single_thread` and `passmark_singlethread` entries. Notably, the Core 7 360 does not win any Cinebench single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 7 366H scores 4020 versus 1924, a 52.1% lead. This suggests the Core 7 360's single-thread advantage is specific to the PassMark workload, not a general property across all single-threaded benchmarks.

The use-case split is clear. For rendering, compression, encryption, physics simulation, and any workload that scales with core count, the Ultra 7 366H is the stronger part by a wide margin. For a specific PassMark single-thread measurement, the Core 7 360 holds a modest edge, but that advantage does not extend to other single-thread tests in the data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share several fundamentals. Both use a 3 nm process node fabricated by Intel, both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, and both have the same L1 cache configuration of 192 KB per core and L2 cache of 2.5 MB per core. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The core counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 366H also carries a different architecture and codename: it is built on Panther Lake (Panther Lake-H generation), while the Core 7 360 uses Wildcat Lake (Core 5 generation). The L3 cache scales with the core count: the Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared L3, while the Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB shared L3, a threefold difference.

Memory support also differs. The Core 7 360 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 7 366H uses a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. This nearly doubles the available memory bandwidth for the larger chip. PCIe connectivity follows the same pattern: the Core 7 360 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 366H offers Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 7 360 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 7 366H has Intel Xe3 Graphics without a specified Xe core count.

The sockets are different: the Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, the Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540. The base clocks differ (1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360, 2.00 GHz for the Ultra 7 366H), but the boost clocks are identical at 4.80 GHz. The TDP also differs, with the Core 7 360 at 15 and the Ultra 7 366H at 25. The release dates are close: the Ultra 7 366H launched on 2026-01-04, the Core 7 360 on 2026-04-15.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The Core Ultra 7 366H is the superior processor for almost every measured workload. It leads by 52.1% in all three Cinebench multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23) and by similar margins in the single-core variants of those same tests. The PassMark suite shows the same story, with the Ultra 7 366H ahead by 53.5% in multithread, 56.4% in data compression, 56.6% in floating-point math, and 59.1% in integer math. The only exception is the PassMark single-thread test, where the Core 7 360 wins by 5.7%.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this: 41263 for the Ultra 7 366H versus 18374 for the Core 7 360. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 7 366H include the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (avg score 41215, 0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41208, 0.1% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41376, -0.3% delta). The Core 7 360's nearest rivals are lower-tier parts: the Intel Core i3-13100 (18380, 0% delta), the Intel Core 5 330 (18345, 0.2% delta), the Intel Core i3-14100 (18318, 0.3% delta), and the Intel Core 3 305 (18302, 0.4% delta).

A system builder choosing between these two should base the decision on the workload. For multi-threaded rendering, data processing, encryption, or physics, the Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice, offering roughly double the performance in most tests. For a workload that specifically relies on the PassMark single-thread score, the Core 7 360 holds a small edge, but that edge is narrow and does not appear in Cinebench single-core results. The Ultra 7 366H also offers more memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and a newer architecture generation, all of which support its higher performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB shared L3 cache, while the Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the single-thread performance comparison?

A: The Core 7 360 wins the PassMark single-thread test with 4274 versus 4043 for the Ultra 7 366H, a 5.7% margin. However, the Ultra 7 366H wins all Cinebench single-core tests by 52.1%.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory. The memory bus differs: the Core 7 360 uses single-channel with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 7 366H uses dual-channel with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: Both processors have a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The base clocks differ: 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360 and 2.00 GHz for the Ultra 7 366H.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H has an average benchmark score of 41263, compared to 18374 for the Core 7 360. The Ultra 7 366H sits in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, the Core 7 360 in the 72nd.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Core Ultra 7 366H comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it scores 326 against 120, a 63.2% advantage. The data encryption test shows a 56.8% gap (25845 vs 11164), and floating-point math shows 56.6% (103615 vs 44963). Data compression is close behind at 56.4% (327455 vs 142877). The physics test shows a 57.9% gap (2880 vs 1213), and random string sorting shows 55.7% (39814 vs 17636). Integer math is 59.1% in favor of the Ultra 7 366H (83695 vs 34238), and extended instructions are 53.9% (26901 vs 12390). The multithread PassMark test shows 53.5% (33429 vs 15544).

The Cinebench results are uniform: every test, single-core or multi-core, shows a 52.1% lead for the Ultra 7 366H. In Cinebench R15, the multi-core score is 2870 versus 1374, and the single-core score is 405 versus 193. In R20, the multi-core score is 11960 versus 5726, and the single-core score is 1688 versus 808. In R23, the multi-core score is 28477 versus 13634, and the single-core score is 4020 versus 1924.

The only wins for the Core 7 360 are in the two identical PassMark single-thread entries. Both show 4274 for the Core 7 360 and 4043 for the Ultra 7 366H, a 5.7% delta. These two wins account for the Core 7 360's 2 wins out of 17 total head-to-head tests. The data does not show any other test where the Core 7 360 takes the lead.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ most significantly: 6 cores and 6 threads for the Core 7 360, 16 cores and 16 threads for the Ultra 7 366H. The L3 cache is 6 MB for the Core 7 360 and 18 MB for the Ultra 7 366H. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s for the Core 7 360 versus 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 7 366H, due to the single-channel versus dual-channel memory bus. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 6 lanes for the Core 7 360, Gen 5 with 12 lanes for the Ultra 7 366H. The base clock is 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360 and 2.00 GHz for the Ultra 7 366H, while the boost clock is 4.80 GHz for both. TDP is 15 for the Core 7 360 and 25 for the Ultra 7 366H. The socket is Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 7 360 and Intel BGA 2540 for the Ultra 7 366H. The core architecture is Wildcat Lake for the Core 7 360 and Panther Lake for the Ultra 7 366H, with the latter designated as Core Ultra Series 3. The integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores for the Core 7 360, Intel Xe3 Graphics without a specified core count for the Ultra 7 366H. The release dates are 2026-04-15 for the Core 7 360 and 2026-01-04 for the Ultra 7 366H. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426; the Ultra 7 366H has no recorded launch MSRP.