Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in this matchup, with the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V taking 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 7 360 manages only 3 wins, two of which are ties in the PassMark single-thread tests. The average benchmark score tells the same story: the Core Ultra 9 288V posts 23219 against 18374 for the Core 7 360, a gap of roughly 26%.

The most dramatic single result favors the Core 7 360. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 7 360 scores 13634 against 10178 for the Core Ultra 9 288V, a 34% advantage. This is the largest delta in either direction across the entire benchmark set. The result is particularly striking because the Core Ultra 9 288V wins the other three Cinebench multi-core tests, including a 1583 to 1374 win in R15 (a 13.2% edge) and a 7069 to 5726 win in R20 (a 19% edge). The R23 result inverts the pattern, suggesting a workload-specific behavior rather than a general multi-core superiority.

The Core Ultra 9 288V dominates the single-core Cinebench tests. In R15 single-core, it scores 301.5 against 193 for the Core 7 360, a 36% lead. In R20 single-core, the margin is 19% (997 versus 808). In R23 single-core, the gap narrows to just 1.3% (1950 versus 1924), with the Core Ultra 9 288V still ahead. The PassMark single-thread tests produce a dead heat at 4274 points each, and the database credits both as wins for the Core 7 360.

Across the PassMark suite, the Core Ultra 9 288V shows consistent advantages. The largest margins appear in prime number finding (195 versus 120, a 38.5% lead) and physics (1637 versus 1213, a 25.9% lead). Data compression shows a 23.4% gap (186521 versus 142877), floating-point math a 24.5% gap (59536 versus 44963), and integer math a 22.2% gap (44019 versus 34238). Extended instructions, encryption, multithread, and random string sorting all show leads between 20.6% and 22% for the Core Ultra 9 288V.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V wins in nearly every measured category, but the distribution of its wins reveals specific strengths. Its largest advantages come in prime number finding and physics, both of which are sensitive to raw core count and memory throughput. The Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores against 6 for the Core 7 360, and its dual-channel memory bus delivers 136.5 GB/s against a single-channel 59.7 GB/s for the Core 7 360. That memory bandwidth difference likely explains the 38.5% lead in prime number work and the broad PassMark advantages in compression, encryption, and math operations, all of which scale with memory bandwidth.

The Core Ultra 9 288V also leads in the Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests, with margins of 13.2% and 19% respectively. These are older Cinebench versions that respond more directly to core count and clock speed. The Core Ultra 9 288V boosts to 5.10 GHz against 4.80 GHz for the Core 7 360, and its 8 cores versus 6 provide a structural advantage. The R23 multi-core result breaks this pattern, however, with the Core 7 360 winning by 34%. The R23 workload appears to favor the Wildcat Lake design, possibly due to the Core 7 360's 6 MB shared L3 cache and the different memory controller behavior, though the database does not specify a precise cause.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in one specific area: the PassMark single-thread tests, where both processors score exactly 4274. This is a tie, and the database awards the win to the Core 7 360 in both the "single_thread" and "singlethread" entries. The result indicates that for this particular single-threaded PassMark metric, the two processors are functionally identical, despite the Core Ultra 9 288V's higher boost clock and larger cache. The Core 7 360 also holds its own in Cinebench R23 single-core, trailing by only 1.3%, which is a narrow enough margin to be considered noise in many testing scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V uses Lunar Lake, part of the Core Ultra Series 2. Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: Intel fabricates the Core 7 360, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 9 288V.

Core counts differ. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading. The Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Both processors have 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache differs significantly: the Core 7 360 has 6 MB shared, while the Core Ultra 9 288V has 12 MB shared, double the capacity.

Clock speeds favor the Core Ultra 9 288V. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz against 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 360, and its boost clock is 5.10 GHz against 4.80 GHz. The Core 7 360 has a 15 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 9 288V has a 30 W TDP, indicating a higher power envelope for the latter.

Memory support also differs. The Core 7 360 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core Ultra 9 288V supports only LPDDR5X. The memory bus is single-channel on the Core 7 360 and dual-channel on the Core Ultra 9 288V. This produces a large bandwidth gap: 59.7 GB/s versus 136.5 GB/s. The Core Ultra 9 288V's dual-channel setup gives it more than double the theoretical memory bandwidth, which aligns with its PassMark wins in bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core 7 360 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 9 288V uses Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 7 360 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 9 288V has Arc 140V. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Sockets are not interchangeable. The Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 9 288V uses Intel BGA 2833. The release dates differ substantially: the Core Ultra 9 288V launched on 2024-09-23, while the Core 7 360 launched on 2026-04-15, a gap of roughly 18 months. The Core 7 360 has a launch MSRP of $426; the Core Ultra 9 288V has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has an average benchmark score of 23219, compared to 18374 for the Intel Core 7 360. This places the Core Ultra 9 288V at the 76th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 360 sits at the 72nd percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The results are mixed. The Core Ultra 9 288V wins Cinebench R15 multi-core with 1583 against 1374 (a 13.2% lead) and R20 multi-core with 7069 against 5726 (a 19% lead). The Core 7 360 wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with 13634 against 10178, a 34% advantage.

Q: Are the single-thread scores similar?

A: In PassMark, both processors score exactly 4274 in both single-thread tests, a tie. In Cinebench, the Core Ultra 9 288V leads in all three versions: R15 single-core by 36% (301.5 versus 193), R20 single-core by 19% (997 versus 808), and R23 single-core by 1.3% (1950 versus 1924).

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Core 7 360 supports single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 9 288V supports dual-channel memory with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth. Both support LPDDR5X, but the Core 7 360 also supports DDR5.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: Both have 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core. The Core 7 360 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 9 288V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor uses hyperthreading, so thread counts equal core counts for both.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 360 | Intel Core Ultra 9 288V |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 6 | 8 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 30 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Architecture | (not recorded) | Lunar Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 9 (Lunar Lake) |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 12 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| 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 | SRPMSSRPMWQ5JTQ5JUQ5KW |

Both processors use a 3 nm process node, have 192 KB L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB L2 cache per core, disable ECC memory support, and have locked multipliers. Both are mobile-market parts with active production status. The nearest rival comparisons place the Core 7 360 against the Intel Core i3-13100, Intel Core 5 330, Intel Core i3-14100, and Intel Core 3 305, with delta percentages between 0% and 0.4%. The Core Ultra 9 288V sits near the Intel Core i9-11900F, AMD EPYC 4124P, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, and Intel Core Ultra 7 266V, with deltas between -0.3% and 0.2%.