Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus records an average benchmark score of 66,855, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H records 40,518. The desktop part sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the mobile part sits at the 87th percentile.

Q: Which processor wins more individual benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins only 2, both in single-core Cinebench tests.

Q: Does the mobile processor have any single-core advantage?

A: Yes. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ultra X7 368H scores 401 against 328 for the Ultra 5 250K Plus, a 18.2% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the mobile part scores 3,984 versus 2,261, a 43.2% advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H boosts to 5.00 GHz. The desktop part also has a higher base clock at 4.20 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP classification for each?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is rated at 125 W TDP and is a desktop part. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is rated at 25 W TDP and is a mobile part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different Intel generations. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake Refresh, using the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3, using the Panther Lake architecture and Panther Lake-H generation.

Both are manufactured on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ. The Ultra 5 250K Plus is built by TSMC, while the Ultra X7 368H is built by Intel. The desktop part has a documented transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm². The mobile part has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

The cache hierarchies differ in the L2 and L3 levels. Both share a 192 KB L1 cache per core. The Ultra 5 250K Plus has 3 MB of L2 per core and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X7 368H has 2.5 MB of L2 per core and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither part has a 3D V-Cache option.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The desktop part uses DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The mobile part uses LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth and does not support ECC. The mobile processor actually records a higher memory bandwidth figure despite its lower power envelope.

PCIe lane allocation differs substantially. The Ultra 5 250K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes (CPU only). This reflects the desktop part's need to drive expansion slots and peripherals, while the mobile part relies on a more integrated platform.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The desktop part uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The mobile part uses Arc B390 graphics. The socket types are incompatible: the Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851, while the Ultra X7 368H uses Intel BGA 2540. The desktop part has an unlocked multiplier; the mobile part does not.

The release dates in the database place the Ultra X7 368H earlier, with a release date of 2026-01-04, while the Ultra 5 250K Plus follows on 2026-03-10. The desktop part has a recorded launch MSRP of $199; the mobile part has no recorded launch MSRP. Both parts are listed as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data separates these processors by market segment first. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop processor with an 18-core, 18-thread configuration, a 125 W TDP, and a 93rd percentile ranking. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a mobile processor with 16 cores and 16 threads, a 25 W TDP, and an 87th percentile ranking. The desktop part targets sustained multi-threaded workloads; the mobile part targets power-constrained systems.

The average benchmark scores make the performance gap explicit. The Ultra 5 250K Plus delivers an average score of 66,855, which is 65% higher than the Ultra X7 368H's 40,518. The nearest rivals for the desktop part include the AMD EPYC 4465P at 66,925 (0.1% higher) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX at 67,469 (0.9% higher). The nearest rivals for the mobile part include the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H at 40,431 (0.2% lower) and the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40,557 (0.1% higher). These percentile and rival data confirm that the Ultra 5 250K Plus competes in a higher performance class entirely.

The single-core situation complicates a simple ranking. The Ultra X7 368H wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 18.2% and Cinebench R23 single-core by 43.2%. For workloads that depend on single-thread performance, the mobile part shows a clear advantage in these specific tests. However, the desktop part still wins PassMark single-thread by 18.8%, so the single-core story depends on the benchmark methodology.

Most application workloads favor the desktop part. In multi-core Cinebench tests, the Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by 9.4% in R23, 55.6% in R20, and 63.2% in R15. In PassMark integer math, floating point math, encryption, compression, and multithread tests, the desktop part leads by margins between 22.3% and 81.7%. The desktop processor is the choice for compute-heavy tasks that scale across many cores.

The mobile part's strengths are its power efficiency, its higher memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s, and its single-core Cinebench results. It suits systems where the 25 W TDP and mobile socket are mandatory. The desktop part suits systems where performance per socket is the priority and the 125 W TDP is acceptable.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus | Intel Core Ultra X7 368H |

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

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

| Cores | 18 | 16 |

| Threads | 18 | 16 |

| Base clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Arrow Lake Refresh | Panther Lake |

| 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 | 30 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | Arc B390 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2026-03-10 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $199 | Not recorded |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates the multi-threaded and throughput-oriented tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 4,640 against 2,844, a 63.2% margin. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it scores 18,442 against 11,852, a 55.6% margin. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the gap narrows to 9.4%, with scores of 30,867 and 28,221. The R23 result suggests that the mobile part scales more efficiently as the workload duration increases, but it still trails.

The PassMark suite shows consistent desktop dominance. The largest margin appears in data compression, where the Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 568,721 against 312,927, an 81.7% advantage. Random string sorting follows closely at 81.4% (69,090 versus 38,093). Extended instructions show a 73.6% margin (44,565 versus 25,669). Data encryption shows a 67.1% margin (42,144 versus 25,228). Floating point math scores 162,692 against 105,681, a 53.9% advantage. Integer math scores 125,091 against 88,083, a 42% advantage. Find prime numbers scores 486 against 321, a 51.4% advantage. The multithread test shows 51,596 against 32,956, a 56.6% margin. Physics shows 3,494 against 2,857, a 22.3% margin.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H takes two single-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 401 against 328, an 18.2% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3,984 against 2,261, a 43.2% advantage. These are the only two head-to-head tests won by the mobile part. The Cinebench R20 single-core test goes the other way, with the desktop part scoring 2,603 against 1,673, a 55.6% margin. The discrepancy between R15/R23 and R20 suggests workload-specific sensitivity in the single-core results.

The PassMark single-thread test favors the desktop part. The Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 4,757 against 4,005, an 18.8% margin. This result appears twice in the head-to-head data, under the test names passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, with identical scores and deltas.

The overall win count is decisive. The desktop part wins 15 of 17 comparisons. The mobile part wins 2. The average benchmark score difference of 26,337 points between the two parts places them in different performance tiers. The desktop part's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 4465P at 66,925 (0.1% higher), while the mobile part's nearest rival is the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40,557 (0.1% higher). Neither part's closest rival is the other processor, which confirms that they do not directly compete in the same performance envelope.