Intel Core i7-12850HX vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive verdict: the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i7-12850HX takes only 3. The largest single margin belongs to the Ultra X7 368H in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 3984 against 1720.5, a 56.8% advantage. That gap is not marginal; it indicates a fundamentally stronger per-thread architecture. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra X7 368H again dominates, scoring 28221 versus 16301.5, a 42.2% lead. The i7-12850HX cannot close that gap despite having 24 threads versus 16, because the newer chip's individual cores are far more efficient.

The Ultra X7 368H also wins in Cinebench R15 multi-core (2844 vs 2679, a 5.8% lead) and R20 multi-core (11852 vs 10907, an 8% lead). Single-core results follow the same pattern: R15 shows 401 vs 260.5 (35% lead), and R20 shows 1673 vs 1539 (8% lead). PassMark tests reinforce the trend. The Ultra X7 368H wins floating point math (105681 vs 79337, a 24.9% lead), physics (2857 vs 1813, a 36.5% lead), data encryption (25228 vs 21120, a 16.3% lead), extended instructions (25669 vs 22227, a 13.4% lead), and find prime numbers (321 vs 111, a 65.4% lead). Even in multithreaded PassMark, despite fewer threads, the Ultra X7 368H scores 32956 versus 30627, a 7.1% lead.

The i7-12850HX, however, holds three notable victories. Its biggest win is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 108076 versus 88083, a 22.7% lead. It also wins data compression (365829 vs 312927, a 16.9% lead) and random string sorting (40327 vs 38093, a 5.9% lead). These wins point to workloads where raw thread count and older-style integer throughput still matter. The Ultra X7 368H's single-thread score in PassMark is 4005 versus 3683, an 8% lead, but that advantage does not translate to every integer-heavy task.

Where Each One Wins

The data splits cleanly into two usage profiles. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is the clear choice for rendering, scientific computation, and general productivity. Every Cinebench test, whether single-core or multi-core, goes to the Ultra X7 368H. Its 56.8% lead in R23 single-core and 42.2% lead in R23 multi-core suggest that applications relying on modern instruction execution and high clock speeds will see substantial gains. The PassMark physics score (2857 vs 1813, a 36.5% lead) indicates stronger simulation performance, which matters for engineering workloads. Floating point math (24.9% lead) and extended instructions (13.4% lead) further solidify its position for number-crunching tasks.

The Intel Core i7-12850HX wins in specific data-handling scenarios. Its 22.7% lead in integer math points to workloads like database operations or cryptographic hashing that favor many threads over high per-core speed. The 16.9% lead in data compression and 5.9% lead in random string sorting suggest file archiving or text-processing pipelines benefit from the 24-thread configuration. However, these wins are narrow in scope. The Ultra X7 368H still wins data encryption by 16.3%, so the i7-12850HX's advantage does not extend to all security-related tasks.

For mixed workloads, the Ultra X7 368H is more consistent. It wins multithread PassMark despite having 16 threads to the i7-12850HX's 24, which indicates superior thread scheduling and per-core efficiency. The i7-12850HX only wins where massive parallelism meets simple integer operations. Users running modern creative suites, compilers, or physics simulations should favor the Ultra X7 368H. Users running legacy code that scales linearly with thread count and does not benefit from newer vector instructions may still prefer the i7-12850HX.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984 versus 1720.5 for the Intel Core i7-12850HX, a 56.8% advantage. Its PassMark single-thread score is also higher at 4005 versus 3683.

Q: Does the i7-12850HX win in any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins three tests: PassMark integer math (108076 vs 88083, a 22.7% lead), PassMark data compression (365829 vs 312927, a 16.9% lead), and PassMark random string sorting (40327 vs 38093, a 5.9% lead).

Q: How do the thread counts compare?

A: The i7-12850HX has 24 threads, while the Ultra X7 368H has 16 threads. Despite fewer threads, the Ultra X7 368H wins PassMark multithread by 7.1% (32956 vs 30627) and Cinebench R23 multi-core by 42.2%.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ultra X7 368H boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the i7-12850HX boosts to 4.80 GHz. The base clocks are 2.00 GHz and 2.10 GHz, respectively.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Ultra X7 368H supports LPDDR5X with a recorded bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The i7-12850HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 but has no listed bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: Which chip has better integrated graphics?

A: The Ultra X7 368H features Arc B390 graphics, while the i7-12850HX features UHD Graphics 770. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores for comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The i7-12850HX has 16 cores and 24 threads, while the Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the i7-12850HX and 2.00 GHz for the Ultra X7 368H. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 5.00 GHz, respectively. Thermal design power differs significantly: the i7-12850HX is rated at 55 W, while the Ultra X7 368H is rated at 25 W. The i7-12850HX uses the Intel BGA 1964 socket, the Ultra X7 368H uses Intel BGA 2540. Memory support also diverges: the i7-12850HX accepts DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra X7 368H accepts LPDDR5X only. The i7-12850HX supports ECC memory, the Ultra X7 368H does not. PCIe lanes differ as well: the i7-12850HX provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The i7-12850HX has an unlocked multiplier; the Ultra X7 368H does not. The i7-12850HX has a launch MSRP of $428, while the Ultra X7 368H has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The i7-12850HX is built on Intel's Alder Lake architecture, specifically Alder Lake-HX, using a 10 nm process node. The Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, a significantly more advanced manufacturing process. The die size for the i7-12850HX is 215 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Ultra X7 368H. Cache configurations differ sharply. The i7-12850HX has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 25 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X7 368H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite having less total L3, the Ultra X7 368H's larger per-core caches likely contribute to its single-core dominance. The i7-12850HX supports dual-channel memory with DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra X7 368H supports dual-channel LPDDR5X with a recorded bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The i7-12850HX integrates UHD Graphics 770; the Ultra X7 368H integrates Arc B390. The i7-12850HX was released on 2022-05-09, while the Ultra X7 368H was released on 2026-01-04. The production status for both is listed as Active. The i7-12850HX has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Ultra X7 368H is locked.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is the superior processor for almost every measured workload. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all Cinebench iterations and the majority of PassMark tests. Its 56.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 42.2% lead in multi-core are decisive. The 3 nm Panther Lake architecture, combined with a 5.00 GHz boost clock and larger per-core caches, delivers performance that the older Alder Lake design cannot match, even with fewer threads. The 25 W TDP also indicates significantly better efficiency, though the database does not include power consumption measurements.

The Intel Core i7-12850HX retains relevance only for specific integer-heavy and data-compression tasks. Its 22.7% lead in integer math, 16.9% lead in data compression, and 5.9% lead in random string sorting show that 24 threads still matter for certain legacy or parallel workloads. Users running such applications may find the i7-12850HX adequate, but they should expect lower performance in rendering, physics, encryption, and floating-point operations. The i7-12850HX also offers ECC memory support and an unlocked multiplier, features absent from the Ultra X7 368H, which may appeal to specific professional or enthusiast use cases.

For most buyers, the Ultra X7 368H is the clear recommendation. Its single-core and multi-core wins across Cinebench and PassMark cover a broader range of real-world applications. The only scenario where the i7-12850HX makes sense is one dominated by the three specific workloads it wins, or where ECC memory and overclocking are hard requirements. The recorded data shows a processor generation gap that the Ultra X7 368H exploits fully. The i7-12850HX is not obsolete, but it is outmatched.