Intel Core Ultra 5 336H vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

Intel Core Ultra 5 336H and Intel Processor N150 occupy opposite ends of Intel's mobile lineup. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the analysis reveals two distinct design philosophies: one built for sustained throughput, the other for minimal power draw. This comparison examines where each processor dominates, what separates their architectures, and how their recorded benchmarks translate into real-world roles.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark database shows the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H winning all four recorded head-to-head tests, including multi-core and single-core workloads. Its advantage is overwhelming in multi-threaded scenarios: the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 versus 2590.5 for the N150 represents a 826.1% delta. This is not a marginal lead; it is a generational gap in compute capability.

The Intel Processor N150, by contrast, wins in the efficiency domain. Its 6 W TDP against the Ultra 5 336H's 25 W TDP suggests a fundamental trade-off. The N150's 4 cores and 4 threads, paired with a 0.10 GHz base clock, prioritize low power consumption over raw speed. The data indicates the N150 is designed for fanless or passively cooled systems, where the Ultra 5 336H's thermal requirements would be prohibitive.

The use-case split is stark. The Ultra 5 336H targets productivity, content creation, and any workload that scales with core count. The N150 targets basic tasks: web browsing, document editing, media playback. The 84th percentile ranking of the Ultra 5 336H against all CPUs, versus the N150's 28th percentile, confirms their intended market positions.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these processors is substantial. The Ultra 5 336H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, while the N150 uses Twin Lake architecture on a 10 nm node. This process advantage alone explains much of the performance gap: the 3 nm node allows for higher transistor density and better power efficiency at peak performance.

Core counts tell the primary story. The Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, four times the N150's 4 cores and 4 threads. The cache hierarchy reinforces this divide. The Ultra 5 336H features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The N150 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 336H's 18 MB L3 cache is three times larger than the N150's total cache.

Memory support diverges sharply. The Ultra 5 336H uses dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The N150 uses single-channel DDR4, DDR5, or LPDDR5 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. That threefold bandwidth difference directly impacts memory-intensive workloads like data compression and encryption.

The integrated graphics differ as well: the Ultra 5 336H carries Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the N150 uses UHD Graphics 730. PCIe connectivity also separates them, with the Ultra 5 336H supporting Gen 5 with 12 lanes versus the N150's Gen 3 with 9 lanes. Both use Intel BGA sockets, but different ones: BGA 2540 for the Ultra 5 336H, BGA 1264 for the N150.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the most extreme gap. The Ultra 5 336H scores 23991 against the N150's 2590.5, a delta of 826.1%. This test scales across all available cores, and the 16-core configuration demolishes the 4-core N150. The result indicates the Ultra 5 336H can handle rendering, compilation, and simulation workloads that would saturate the N150.

Cinebench R23 single-core shows a narrower but still decisive margin: 3387 versus 935, a 262.2% delta. Single-core performance reflects clock speed and IPC. The Ultra 5 336H boosts to 4.60 GHz, and its 3 nm Panther Lake cores deliver far higher instructions per clock than the N150's 3.60 GHz Twin Lake cores. The N150's 0.10 GHz base clock highlights its power-saving design, but even at boost, it trails the Ultra 5 336H's base clock of 1.90 GHz.

Cinebench R15 multi-core delivers 2418 for the Ultra 5 336H versus 422.5 for the N150, a 472.3% delta. This older benchmark still stresses all cores, and the pattern matches the R23 result. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 341 versus 153.15, a 122.7% delta. The single-core margin in R15 is smaller than in R23, suggesting the N150's older cores lose more ground as the benchmark's instruction mix becomes more demanding.

The PassMark suite, available only for the Ultra 5 336H, provides additional context. Data compression scores 280340, encryption 21291, and integer math 62070. These figures, while not directly comparable to the N150, indicate the Ultra 5 336H's capability in structured computational tasks. The N150 lacks these benchmark entries, which itself suggests its intended workload does not include such heavy lifting.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications differ in nearly every measurable field. Core count: 16 versus 4. Threads: 16 versus 4. Base clock: 1.90 GHz versus 0.10 GHz. Boost clock: 4.60 GHz versus 3.60 GHz. TDP: 25 W versus 6 W. The architecture differs: Panther Lake versus Twin Lake. Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm.

Cache configurations diverge completely. The Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The N150 has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The L2 design is particularly notable: per-core for the Ultra 5 336H, shared for the N150.

Memory support: the Ultra 5 336H uses DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel access; the N150 uses DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 with single-channel access. Memory bandwidth: 115.2 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. PCIe: Gen 5 with 12 lanes versus Gen 3 with 9 lanes. Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics versus UHD Graphics 730.

Sockets differ: BGA 2540 for the Ultra 5 336H, BGA 1264 for the N150. Release dates also differ: the Ultra 5 336H launched January 2026, the N150 November 2024. Both processors have locked multipliers and do not support ECC memory. Neither lists a launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins decisively. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 exceeds the N150's 2590.5 by 826.1%. The 16-core, 16-thread configuration against 4 cores and 4 threads explains the margin.

Q: What is the performance difference in single-core tests?

A: The Ultra 5 336H leads by 262.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core (3387 versus 935) and by 122.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core (341 versus 153.15). The higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz and newer 3 nm architecture drive this advantage.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The N150 has a 6 W TDP versus the Ultra 5 336H's 25 W TDP. The N150's 0.10 GHz base clock reflects its power-focused design, while the Ultra 5 336H uses its 25 W budget for sustained multi-core performance.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The Ultra 5 336H offers 115.2 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X support. The N150 provides 38.4 GB/s with single-channel DDR4, DDR5, or LPDDR5. The Ultra 5 336H's bandwidth is three times higher.

Q: How do their cache sizes differ?

A: The Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The N150 has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 336H's L3 cache is three times larger.

Q: Where does each processor rank among all CPUs?

A: The Ultra 5 336H sits at the 84th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 34485. The N150 sits at the 28th percentile, with an average score of 1025. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 5 336H include the Intel Core i7-13700HX at -0.2%, while the N150's nearest rival is the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T at +0.1%.

The Verdict

The data presents a binary choice. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is for users who need processing power: 16 cores, 4.60 GHz boost, 18 MB L3 cache, and a 115.2 GB/s memory interface. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 places it near the Intel Core i7-13700HX, which scores 34554 on average with a -0.2% delta. The 84th percentile ranking confirms its position in the upper tier of mobile processors.

The Intel Processor N150 is for systems where power consumption is the primary constraint. Its 6 W TDP, 4 cores, and 0.10 GHz base clock make it suitable for lightweight, always-on devices. Its 28th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 1025 place it near the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and Intel Core i3-4340, both within 0.1% delta. The N150 does not compete with the Ultra 5 336H in any recorded benchmark; it exists for a different purpose.

The benchmark results indicate no overlap in their intended use cases. The Ultra 5 336H delivers workstation-class multi-threaded performance in a 25 W envelope. The N150 delivers basic computing at a fraction of the power draw. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the workload demands the Ultra 5 336H's 826.1% multi-core advantage or the N150's efficiency profile. The recorded data offers no middle ground.