Intel Core Ultra 5 336H vs Intel Xeon 6349P Comparison

# Intel Xeon 6349P vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H

The Intel Xeon 6349P and Intel Core Ultra 5 336H occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum—a 6-core server/workstation processor on Socket 1700 versus a 16-core mobile chip on BGA 2540—yet their benchmark averages sit remarkably close. The Xeon 6349P posts an average benchmark score of 34,890, while the Core Ultra 5 336H lands at 34,485, a negligible gap that masks dramatically different performance profiles. Both processors rank at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, but the data reveals that the Core Ultra 5 336H wins 13 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Xeon 6349P secures 4 wins. The story is not about which is faster overall—it is about which workloads reward each architecture's distinct design philosophy.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon 6349P reaches a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, compared to 4.60 GHz for the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H. The Xeon's higher boost clock contributes to its single-thread advantage in Passmark, where it scores 4,528 versus 4,013 for the Core Ultra 5 336H.

Q: How do the core counts differ between these two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H packs 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6349P offers 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Xeon 6349P uses hyper-threading to reach 12 threads, whereas the Core Ultra 5 336H operates with a 1:1 core-to-thread ratio.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon 6349P supports ECC memory, making it suitable for server and workstation environments where data integrity is critical. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H does not support ECC memory, reflecting its mobile market positioning.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Intel Xeon 6349P is built on a 10 nm process node, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses a 3 nm process node. This manufacturing difference likely contributes to the Core Ultra 5 336H's significantly lower TDP of 25 watts compared to the Xeon 6349P's 95 watts.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H features a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel Xeon 6349P. The Core Ultra 5 336H also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, whereas the Xeon 6349P supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H scores 23,991 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 8.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6349P's 21,924. This advantage persists across all Cinebench versions, with the Core Ultra 5 336H winning R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H dominates the Cinebench suite entirely, winning all six tests with consistent 8.6–8.8% margins. It also excels in Passmark's data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting. The physics test is particularly lopsided—the Core Ultra 5 336H scores 2,682 versus the Xeon 6349P's 1,408, a 47.5% advantage. This pattern suggests the Core Ultra 5 336H's 16 cores deliver superior throughput for parallel workloads that scale well with core count.

The Intel Xeon 6349P wins in data compression (306,774 vs 280,340, a 9.4% edge), integer math (82,443 vs 62,070, a 32.8% advantage), and the Passmark single-thread test (4,528 vs 4,013, a 12.8% lead). The integer math result is striking—a 6-core processor beating a 16-core chip by nearly a third in this workload suggests the Xeon 6349P's high clock speeds and architecture favor integer operations. The single-thread win aligns with the Xeon's 5.70 GHz boost clock, which exceeds the Core Ultra 5 336H's 4.60 GHz by over a gigahertz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors stem from different Intel design lineages. The Intel Xeon 6349P uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, part of the Xeon 6 generation. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process with a die size of 163 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H employs Panther Lake architecture from the Ultra 5 generation, built on a 3 nm process node. The Core Ultra 5 336H integrates Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the Xeon 6349P has no integrated graphics.

Cache configurations reveal distinct design priorities. The Xeon 6349P provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. The Core Ultra 5 336H offers 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core—more than double the per-core cache at each level. Both share 18 MB of L3 cache, but the Core Ultra 5 336H's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches likely support its efficiency advantages.

The market segments diverge sharply. The Xeon 6349P targets server and workstation deployments with ECC memory support and a server-grade feature set. The Core Ultra 5 336H is a mobile processor with a 25-watt TDP, designed for laptops and portable devices. The Xeon 6349P's 95-watt TDP reflects its desktop/server socket and higher power envelope.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ substantially: the Xeon 6349P has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds also diverge—the Xeon 6349P runs at 3.60 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost, whereas the Core Ultra 5 336H operates at 1.90 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The Xeon 6349P's base clock is nearly double the Core Ultra 5 336H's.

Socket compatibility separates the two entirely. The Xeon 6349P uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 336H uses Intel BGA 2540. The latter is a soldered mobile socket, whereas Socket 1700 allows for desktop-style installation. PCIe lane counts also differ: the Xeon 6349P offers 16 CPU-only Gen 5 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 336H provides 12 Gen 5 lanes.

Memory support shows the Xeon 6349P accepting DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but only the Xeon 6349P supports ECC. The Core Ultra 5 336H includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics; the Xeon 6349P has no integrated GPU. The Xeon 6349P was released on February 23, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $509, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has a release date of January 4, 2026, and no listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results tell a consistent story of Core Ultra 5 336H superiority. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 336H scores 2,418 against the Xeon 6349P's 2,209, an 8.6% margin. Single-core R15 shows a similar 8.8% gap (341 vs 311). These margins hold steady through R20 and R23, with the Core Ultra 5 336H leading by 8.6% in every multi-core test and all but one single-core test.

Passmark results reveal more nuanced performance. The Xeon 6349P's data compression score of 306,774 beats the Core Ultra 5 336H's 280,340 by 9.4%. Integer math delivers the largest Xeon advantage: 82,443 versus 62,070, a 32.8% lead. The Xeon 6349P also wins the Passmark single-thread test with 4,528 versus 4,013, a 12.8% advantage that aligns with its higher boost clock.

The Core Ultra 5 336H counters with decisive wins in several Passmark categories. Data encryption shows a 23.7% edge (21,291 vs 16,239). Extended instructions favor the Core Ultra 5 336H by 16.8% (24,542 vs 20,426). The find prime numbers test is the most dramatic divergence: the Core Ultra 5 336H scores 299 against the Xeon 6349P's 90, a 69.9% difference. Floating point math favors the Core Ultra 5 336H by 25% (82,415 vs 61,796), and the multithread score is 9.6% higher (28,545 vs 25,793). Physics shows a 47.5% gap (2,682 vs 1,408), and random string sorting is 9.7% better (34,402 vs 31,056).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload and platform. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is the better choice for general-purpose computing and heavily parallel workloads. Its 16 cores deliver consistent 8.6% advantages across all Cinebench tests and dominate in encryption, physics, and prime number calculations. The 3 nm process node and 25-watt TDP also position it for mobile efficiency, making it suitable for laptops where battery life and thermals matter.

The Intel Xeon 6349P appeals to specific server and workstation scenarios. Its ECC memory support and 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes target data integrity and expansion needs. The 32.8% lead in integer math and 12.8% single-thread advantage suggest workflows that depend on high clock speeds and integer-heavy operations. The data compression win (9.4%) hints at file server or archival workloads where the Xeon 6349P's architecture excels.

Benchmark results indicate that the Core Ultra 5 336H is the more versatile performer, winning 13 of 17 head-to-head tests. Yet the Xeon 6349P's wins are not marginal—the integer math and single-thread results are substantial. For users requiring ECC memory, high single-thread performance, or specific integer workloads, the Xeon 6349P remains compelling. For everyone else, the Core Ultra 5 336H's broader benchmark dominance and lower power draw make it the data-supported recommendation. The 84th percentile ranking for both processors underscores their similarity in overall standing, but the workload-specific data reveals two very different tools for different jobs.