Intel Core Ultra 5 235A vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a dominant performance picture for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A. Out of 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, the Ultra 5 235A wins 16, with the Ultra 7 356H taking a single victory. The most striking margin appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ultra 5 235A scores 4607 against 2040 for the Ultra 7 356H, a 125.8% advantage. That is more than double the score, an unusually large gap for two processors from the same manufacturer.

Multi-core results tell a similar story, though the margins vary. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 235A delivers 32633 versus 18395, a 77.4% lead. The gap narrows considerably in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Ultra 5 235A posts 13705 against 12153, a 12.8% edge. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows the tightest overall margin at 7.7%, with 3289 versus 3055. The trend across the Cinebench suite suggests the Ultra 5 235A scales better as the workload becomes more demanding.

PassMark results reinforce the same pattern. Data compression favors the Ultra 5 235A by 17.1%, with 393800 versus 336177. Data encryption shows a 14.4% lead for the Ultra 5 235A, 30136 against 26345. Extended instructions land at 13.4% ahead, and floating point math at 15.2% ahead. Integer math represents the smallest PassMark gap at 6.6%, with 88626 versus 83111. Random string sorting gives the Ultra 5 235A a 20.7% advantage.

The single PassMark win for the Ultra 7 356H comes in the physics test. Here the Ultra 7 356H scores 2895 against 2437 for the Ultra 5 235A, a 15.8% margin in its favor. This is an isolated result, but it indicates the Ultra 7 356H handles physics simulation workloads better, likely due to its higher core count.

Single-thread performance across all benchmarks favors the Ultra 5 235A. PassMark single-thread shows 4557 versus 4072, an 11.9% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 53.1% gap, with 464 against 303. Cinebench R20 single-core narrows to 12.8%, and Cinebench R23 single-core widens to the largest single-thread margin. The Ultra 5 235A also holds a 13% lead in PassMark multi-thread, scoring 38392 against 33978.

Average benchmark scores place the Ultra 5 235A at 48201, roughly 17% above the Ultra 7 356H at 41215. The percentile ranking puts the Ultra 5 235A at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 7 356H sits at the 87th. These rankings confirm that the Ultra 5 235A is not merely faster in isolated tests but holds a consistent overall advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families. The Ultra 5 235A belongs to Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, and targets the desktop market segment. The Ultra 7 356H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3, uses the Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake codename, and targets the mobile segment.

Both chips use a 3 nm process node, but from different foundries. TSMC fabricates the Ultra 5 235A, while Intel fabricates the Ultra 7 356H. The Ultra 5 235A has a die size of 243 mm² and contains 17,800 million transistors. No die size or transistor count is recorded for the Ultra 7 356H.

Core configuration differs. The Ultra 5 235A has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts for both.

Cache layouts differ as well. Both chips use a 192 KB L1 cache per core. The L2 cache per core is 3 MB on the Ultra 5 235A and 2.5 MB on the Ultra 7 356H. The shared L3 cache totals 24 MB on the Ultra 5 235A and 18 MB on the Ultra 7 356H.

Memory support differs in scope. The Ultra 5 235A supports DDR5 only, while the Ultra 7 356H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses. Recorded memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 5 235A and 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 7 356H, a 12.5% advantage for the mobile chip.

PCIe connectivity differs substantially. The Ultra 5 235A provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 356H provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ultra 5 235A uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units, while the Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The sockets are incompatible. The Ultra 5 235A uses Intel Socket 1851, while the Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540. This reflects the desktop versus mobile positioning. Release dates differ by roughly five months, with the Ultra 5 235A launching on 2025-07-28 and the Ultra 7 356H launching on 2026-01-04. Both are marked as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235A wins every multi-core test. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 77.4% lead, Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 12.8%, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 7.7%. PassMark multi-thread shows a 13% advantage.

Q: Does the Ultra 7 356H win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes. The Ultra 7 356H wins the PassMark physics test, scoring 2895 against 2437, a 15.8% margin. This is its only win across all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The Ultra 5 235A wins every single-core test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the largest gap at 125.8%, Cinebench R15 single-core shows 53.1%, Cinebench R20 single-core shows 12.8%, and PassMark single-thread shows 11.9%.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each?

A: The Ultra 5 235A has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Ultra 5 235A has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 356H has 18 MB, which is 6 MB less.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Ultra 5 235A supports DDR5 only. The Ultra 7 356H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 356H also has higher recorded memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 235A | Intel Core Ultra 7 356H |

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

| Series | Core Ultra Series 2 | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Cores | 14 | 16 |

| Threads | 14 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Arrow Lake-S | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) | Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | Not recorded |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2025-07-28 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $269 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRWPN | SA4RGQ9EU |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 48201 | 41215 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 90 | 87 |

The clock speeds show a clear trade-off. The Ultra 5 235A runs at 3.40 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost, while the Ultra 7 356H runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The TDP reflects the form factor: 65 W for the desktop chip versus 25 W for the mobile chip.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A as the stronger performer in nearly every measured category. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 90th percentile ranking versus the 87th for the Ultra 7 356H, and produces an average benchmark score of 48201 against 41215. The single-core advantage is especially pronounced, with Cinebench R23 showing a 125.8% lead. For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, the Ultra 5 235A is the clear choice.

The Ultra 7 356H is not without merit. Its 16 cores exceed the 14 cores of the Ultra 5 235A, and it wins the PassMark physics test by 15.8%. It also offers higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s, support for LPDDR5X, and a dramatically lower TDP of 25 W versus 65 W. The Ultra 7 356H uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket, which is not compatible with the Socket 1851 desktop platform. These are meaningful differences for specific use cases.

The nearest rival data places both chips in similar competitive territory. The Ultra 5 235A's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 at a 0.1% delta, essentially a tie. The Ultra 7 356H's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at a 0% delta. Both processors sit in the upper tier of the database rankings, but the Ultra 5 235A sits noticeably higher in absolute terms.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 5 235A wins in every content creation and compute-heavy category recorded. Cinebench R23 multi-core, Cinebench R20 multi-core, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, random string sorting, and single-thread tests all favor the desktop chip. Any workload built around rendering, encoding, or heavy mathematical computation will benefit from the Ultra 5 235A's higher clock speeds and larger cache. The 24 MB L3 cache versus 18 MB and the 3 MB per-core L2 versus 2.5 MB provide additional headroom for cache-sensitive applications.

The Ultra 7 356H wins in the PassMark physics test, a workload that appears to favor its 16-core configuration. Physics simulation often scales with core count, and the two additional cores give it an edge here. The mobile chip also records higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s, which could benefit memory-bound tasks. Its 25 W TDP makes it suitable for compact mobile systems where power draw is a constraint. The LPDDR5X support adds flexibility for thin-and-light laptop designs.

The launch MSRP of $269 for the Ultra 5 235A places it as a desktop part with a defined price point, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 7 356H. The Ultra 5 235A offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus 12 lanes on the Ultra 7 356H, making it the better match for systems with multiple high-speed expansion cards or storage devices. The Ultra 7 356H's socket and mobile positioning mean it belongs in laptops, not desktop builds.

For desktop builders focused on raw performance, the Ultra 5 235A is the stronger option in the database. For mobile systems where power efficiency and the physics test advantage matter, the Ultra 7 356H has a defined role. The data does not show a scenario where the Ultra 7 356H outperforms the Ultra 5 235A in general compute tasks, but its lower TDP and memory flexibility give it a distinct place in the mobile market.