Intel Core i9-12950HX vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between these two mobile processors is decisive: the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H takes 13 of the 17 recorded tests, while the Intel Core i9-12950HX wins only 4. That pattern alone suggests the two chips are built for different workloads, and the data confirms it.

The Core i9-12950HX dominates in integer-heavy and compression tasks. Its Passmark integer math score of 109586 beats the Ultra 7 366H's 83695 by 30.9%, the largest margin of any test in the comparison. Data compression also favors the older chip: 367930 versus 327455, a 12.4% advantage. Random string sorting goes to the i9-12950HX as well, with 41209 against 39814, a narrower 3.5% lead. The fourth win comes in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the i9-12950HX scores 3107 versus 2870, an 8.3% margin.

The Core Ultra 7 366H, by contrast, wins nearly everything else, including every single-core test and the newer Cinebench releases. Its single-core advantage is massive: in Cinebench R23 single-core, it posts 4020 against the i9-12950HX's 1885, a 53.1% lead. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 single-core (405 versus 274, a 32.3% gap) and Cinebench R20 single-core (1688 versus 1561, a 7.5% gap). Passmark single-thread also goes to the Ultra 7 366H, 4043 versus 3778, a 6.6% difference.

The Ultra 7 366H also wins in multi-threaded workloads in the newer Cinebench versions. Cinebench R23 multicore shows its biggest overall win: 28477 versus 20263, a 28.8% advantage. Cinebench R20 multicore goes 11960 versus 11061, a 7.5% margin. Passmark multithread gives the Ultra 7 366H a smaller win, 33429 versus 31673, a 5.3% edge.

Looking at the remaining Passmark tests, the Ultra 7 366H shows broad strength. It wins floating point math (103615 versus 80402, a 22.4% lead), physics (2880 versus 2084, a 27.6% lead), find prime numbers (326 versus 135, a 58.6% lead), data encryption (25845 versus 21395, a 17.2% lead), and extended instructions (26901 versus 22163, a 17.6% lead).

The use-case split is clear: the i9-12950HX is the choice for integer math, compression, and sorting workloads. The Ultra 7 366H is better for single-threaded responsiveness, floating-point calculations, encryption, and the latest Cinebench multi-threaded benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations with fundamentally different designs. The Core i9-12950HX uses the Alder Lake architecture, codenamed Alder Lake-HX, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It is part of the Core 12th Gen series, released in May 2022. Its socket is Intel BGA 1964.

The Core Ultra 7 366H uses the Panther Lake architecture, codenamed Panther Lake-H, built on a 3 nm process. It belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, released in January 2026. Its socket is Intel BGA 2540.

Both chips have 16 cores, but the thread counts differ. The i9-12950HX has 24 threads, while the Ultra 7 366H has 16 threads. This means the i9-12950HX uses Hyper-Threading, while the Ultra 7 366H appears to run one thread per core.

Cache layouts are also distinct. The i9-12950HX has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 366H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The newer chip has larger per-core caches but less total L3.

Memory support differs: the i9-12950HX supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 7 366H records a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the i9-12950HX has no recorded bandwidth figure. The i9-12950HX supports ECC memory; the Ultra 7 366H does not.

PCIe connectivity also differs: the i9-12950HX offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 366H offers Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: UHD Graphics 770 on the i9-12950HX versus Intel Xe3 Graphics on the Ultra 7 366H.

The die size is recorded only for the i9-12950HX at 215 mm²; the Ultra 7 366H has no recorded die size. Both chips have locked multipliers and are production active. The i9-12950HX has a launch MSRP of $590; the Ultra 7 366H has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win belongs to the Ultra 7 366H in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it beats the i9-12950HX by 53.1%. A score of 4020 against 1885 shows how far single-threaded performance has advanced between generations. The find prime numbers test shows an even larger percentage gap at 58.6%, but the absolute scores are smaller (326 versus 135), so the R23 single-core result carries more practical weight.

The i9-12950HX's biggest win is in Passmark integer math, where it leads by 30.9%. The 109586 score versus 83695 demonstrates that the older chip's higher thread count and older architecture still excel in integer-heavy computation. Data compression follows at 12.4% (367930 versus 327455), and random string sorting at 3.5% (41209 versus 39814).

The Cinebench R15 multicore test is the only Cinebench multicore test the i9-12950HX wins, with a 8.3% margin (3107 versus 2870). The pattern reverses in Cinebench R20 and R23 multicore, where the Ultra 7 366H wins by 7.5% and 28.8%, respectively.

The Ultra 7 366H also wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 7.5% (1688 versus 1561), Passmark single-thread by 6.6% (4043 versus 3778), Passmark multithread by 5.3% (33429 versus 31673), floating point math by 22.4% (103615 versus 80402), physics by 27.6% (2880 versus 2084), data encryption by 17.2% (25845 versus 21395), and extended instructions by 17.6% (26901 versus 22163).

The average benchmark scores place the i9-12950HX at 42487 and the Ultra 7 366H at 41263. The i9-12950HX sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 7 366H sits at the 87th. The i9-12950HX's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-12900K (0.4% ahead), the Core i9-12900KF (0.8% behind), the Core i9-12900 (1% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 (1% ahead). The Ultra 7 366H's nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (0.3% ahead), and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H (0.7% ahead).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins every single-core test. It leads by 53.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core, 32.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 7.5% in Cinebench R20 single-core, and 6.6% in Passmark single-thread.

Q: Which processor is better for multi-threaded Cinebench workloads?

A: The Ultra 7 366H wins Cinebench R20 multicore by 7.5% and Cinebench R23 multicore by 28.8%. The i9-12950HX only wins Cinebench R15 multicore, by 8.3%.

Q: Does the i9-12950HX win any Passmark tests?

A: Yes, it wins three Passmark tests: integer math (30.9% ahead), data compression (12.4% ahead), and random string sorting (3.5% ahead). The Ultra 7 366H wins the other Passmark tests: multithread, single-thread, floating point math, physics, data encryption, extended instructions, and find prime numbers.

Q: How do their thread counts compare?

A: The i9-12950HX has 16 cores and 24 threads. The Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The i9-12950HX therefore has more threads despite having the same core count.

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: The i9-12950HX has 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 366H does have larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

Q: Do both chips support PCIe Gen 5?

A: Yes, both support PCIe Gen 5, but with different lane counts. The i9-12950HX has 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 366H has 12 lanes (CPU only).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-12950HX | Intel Core Ultra 7 366H |

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

| Series | Core 12th Gen | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1964 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Alder Lake | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Alder Lake-HX | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core i9 (Alder Lake-HX) | Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Die size | 215 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache (per core) | 80 KB | 192 KB |

| L2 cache (per core) | 1.25 MB | 2.5 MB |

| L3 cache (shared) | 30 MB | 18 MB |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 12 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Release date | 2022-05-09 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $590 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SRLGG | SA4R9Q9EL |

The Verdict

The data points to two different buyers. The Intel Core i9-12950HX suits workloads that rely on integer math, data compression, and string sorting. Its 30.9% lead in integer math and 12.4% lead in data compression are substantial, and its 24 threads provide headroom for thread-heavy integer tasks. It also carries a launch MSRP of $590, which is recorded in the database.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H suits single-threaded workloads and modern multi-threaded benchmarks. Its 53.1% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the defining statistic of this comparison. It also wins in floating point math, encryption, physics, and extended instructions, making it the more balanced processor overall. Its 3 nm process node and larger per-core caches explain its efficiency advantages, including a 25 W TDP versus the i9-12950HX's 55 W.

For users running legacy integer-heavy applications, the i9-12950HX remains competitive. For anyone running current Cinebench versions, single-threaded applications, or floating-point workloads, the Ultra 7 366H is the stronger choice. The average benchmark scores are close (42487 versus 41263, a difference of about 3%), but the distribution of wins is lopsided. The Ultra 7 366H wins 13 tests, the i9-12950HX wins 4. The benchmark data favors the Ultra 7 366H for most modern workloads.