Intel Core i7-7700K vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison

The Intel Core i7-7700K and the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL represent two distinct eras of Intel desktop design, yet benchmark results show them landing in a similar overall performance tier. Both processors achieve a 68th percentile ranking against all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are remarkably close: the i7-7700K posts 13291, while the Ultra 3 105UL trails slightly at 13061. Despite this near-parity in overall averages, the head-to-head data reveals a starkly split personality, with the older i7 dominating in specific workloads while the newer chip wins the majority of tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking outcome is the split between synthetic rendering workloads and specialized instruction tests. Across the entire Cinebench suite, the Core Ultra 3 105UL wins every single test, but by a remarkably narrow margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra scores 881 against the i7-7700K's 825, a 6.4% advantage. That same pattern holds for single-core R15 (124 vs 116, 6.5% ahead), R20 multicore (3671 vs 3439, 6.3% ahead), and R20 single-core (518 vs 485, 6.4% ahead). The story repeats in R23, with the Ultra winning multicore 8742 to 8189 and single-core 1234 to 1156, both by 6.3%. The consistency of this ~6% margin across all six Cinebench tests suggests a fundamental architectural efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The PassMark multithread test follows suit, with the Ultra winning 10285 to 9627 (6.4% ahead), and the physics test shows a similar 8.8% gap (718 vs 655). The Ultra's advantage grows substantially in integer math, where it scores 41171 against 30553, a 25.8% lead, and in floating-point math, where it posts 30750 versus 18741, a 39.1% margin. Prime number finding also favors the Ultra at 44 vs 31 (29.5% ahead). Single-thread performance is another clear Ultra win: 3382 vs 2708, a 19.9% advantage.

However, the i7-7700K fights back hard in three specific PassMark categories. Data compression is a landslide for the older chip: 136852 vs 93961, a 45.6% margin. Extended instructions show an even bigger gap at 58.7% (8943 vs 5634). Random string sorting also goes to the i7 at 17208 vs 11179, a 53.9% lead. These three wins are so decisive that they almost offset the Ultra's broader dominance, which is why the overall averages end up so close. The data encryption test is the only other significant outlier, and it goes the other way: the Ultra wins 6354 to 3343, a massive 47.4% advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-7700K is clearly optimized for workloads that rely on heavy data manipulation and legacy instruction sets. Its 45.6% lead in data compression and 58.7% lead in extended instructions suggest that software leveraging older, well-established x86 extensions will run substantially faster on the Kaby Lake part. The 53.9% win in random string sorting reinforces this pattern; these are tasks where the i7's high base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost of 4.50 GHz, combined with its simpler 4-core/8-thread design, appear to excel. If a user's primary applications involve compression utilities, legacy scientific computing, or text processing, the data strongly favors the i7-7700K.

The Core Ultra 3 105UL wins everywhere else, making it the more versatile processor for modern workloads. Its 47.4% advantage in data encryption points to hardware-accelerated cryptographic instructions that the older chip lacks. The 39.1% lead in floating-point math and 25.8% lead in integer math indicate a much stronger arithmetic execution engine, likely benefiting from its 8 cores and 10 threads. The 19.9% single-thread win shows that even on a one-core basis, the newer architecture is faster despite a significantly lower base clock of 1.50 GHz (though it boosts to 4.20 GHz). Rendering workloads, as shown by the Cinebench suite, consistently favor the Ultra by a small but reliable margin.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide explains nearly everything about this benchmark split. The i7-7700K uses Kaby Lake on a 14 nm process, while the Ultra 3 105UL uses Meteor Lake on a 7 nm node. The newer chip's process advantage enables a much higher transistor density and, crucially, a dramatically lower thermal design power: 15 W for the Ultra versus 91 W for the i7. This efficiency gain is remarkable given the Ultra's performance parity in many tests. The Ultra also changes the core layout fundamentally, offering 8 cores and 10 threads versus the i7's 4 cores and 8 threads, with a larger per-core L1 cache (112 KB vs 64 KB) and L2 cache (2 MB vs 256 KB), plus a 10 MB shared L3 versus 8 MB.

Memory and I/O also differ substantially. The Ultra supports DDR5 (dependent on motherboard) with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the i7's DDR4 at 38.4 GB/s. This more than doubling of memory bandwidth likely contributes to the Ultra's wins in math-heavy benchmarks. The Ultra also uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the i7 uses Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Another key difference is the integrated graphics: the Ultra features Arc Xe-LPG 48EU, a much more modern GPU than the i7's HD 630. The i7 has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Ultra is locked. They also use different sockets (1151 vs 1851) and the Ultra has a launch MSRP of $295, while the i7 has no listed MSRP.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different user profiles. If a workload is dominated by data compression, extended instruction sets, or string sorting, the Intel Core i7-7700K is the only rational choice. The benchmark results show leads of 45.6%, 58.7%, and 53.9% respectively, which are enormous margins that no other test offsets. This makes the i7 a specialized tool for legacy software that does not scale across cores and relies on high clock speeds and established instruction paths.

For virtually every other scenario, the Core Ultra 3 105UL is the superior processor. It wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, including all rendering tests, all math tests, and both single-thread tests. Its 47.4% lead in encryption is particularly notable. The Ultra's combination of a 6.3% to 6.5% advantage in Cinebench, a 19.9% single-thread lead, and a far lower power draw makes it the better all-rounder. The only caveat is its 15 W TDP and 1.50 GHz base clock, which might affect sustained multi-core performance in a way not fully captured by these burst-oriented benchmarks. Still, based strictly on the available data, the Ultra 3 105UL is the default recommendation for general use, with the i7-7700K reserved for specific legacy tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i7-7700K wins only 3.

Q: How much faster is the i7-7700K in data compression?

A: The i7-7700K scores 136852 in PassMark data compression, which is 45.6% higher than the Ultra 3 105UL's score of 93961.

Q: What is the single-thread performance gap between the two?

A: The Ultra 3 105UL leads in single-thread tests, scoring 3382 versus the i7-7700K's 2708, a 19.9% advantage.

Q: Are the overall benchmark averages similar?

A: Yes, the i7-7700K has an average benchmark score of 13291, while the Ultra 3 105UL averages 13061, a difference of just 1.7%. Both are in the 68th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i7-7700K has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the Ultra 3 105UL boosts to 4.20 GHz, though the Ultra wins all single-thread benchmarks.

Q: What is the difference in data encryption performance?

A: The Ultra 3 105UL scores 6354 in PassMark data encryption, which is 47.4% higher than the i7-7700K's score of 3343.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-7700K | Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 10 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 91 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Kaby Lake | Meteor Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 (depends on motherboard) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | HD 630 | Arc Xe-LPG 48EU |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SR33A | SRN9D |