Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the desktop-class 270K Plus wins outright, with zero victories for the mobile 356H. The margin is substantial in nearly every category, reflecting the fundamental differences in power envelope and core configuration.

The largest single-core advantage appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 270K Plus scores 3453 against the 356H's 1715, a 101.3% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a smaller but still clear 16.8% lead, with scores of 354 versus 303. PassMark single-thread results confirm the pattern, showing a 24.5% advantage for the 270K Plus at 5068 points compared to 4072 for the 356H.

Multi-threaded workloads amplify the gap considerably. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers the most lopsided result, with the 270K Plus scoring 44253 versus 18395, a 140.6% delta. Cinebench R20 multi-core follows closely at 101.3%, with scores of 24461 and 12153 respectively. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 117.9% delta, with the 270K Plus at 6656 and the 356H at 3055.

PassMark's multi-thread test also shows a 101.8% delta, with 68574 points versus 33978. The data compression workload shows a 139.3% delta, with 804322 points against 336177. Random string sorting shows a 136.5% delta, with 96945 versus 40990. Extended instructions show a 127.6% delta, with 63506 against 27898. Data encryption shows a 124.3% delta, with 59097 versus 26345. Floating point math shows a 122.5% delta, with 229491 against 103128. Integer math shows a 111.7% delta, with 175986 versus 83111.

The smallest delta among all tests is in PassMark physics, where the 270K Plus leads by 40.4%, scoring 4064 against 2895. Prime number finding shows an 88.1% delta, with 615 versus 327. These results indicate that even in workloads where the mobile chip performs relatively better, the desktop part still maintains a commanding lead.

The average benchmark score for the 270K Plus is 93785, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The 356H averages 41215, sitting in the 87th percentile. The delta between their average scores is substantial, and the nearest rival data confirms that the 270K Plus competes in a different tier entirely. Its closest rival, the Intel Xeon 6520P, matches its average score at 93786, while the 356H's nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, sits at 41208, just 0.1% below the mobile part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins every single-core test. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 354 versus 303 (16.8% delta), Cinebench R20 single-core shows 3453 versus 1715 (101.3% delta), Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2439 versus 2040 (19.6% delta), and PassMark single-thread shows 5068 versus 4072 (24.5% delta).

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The 270K Plus leads by 117.9% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (6656 vs 3055), 101.3% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (24461 vs 12153), 140.6% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (44253 vs 18395), and 101.8% in PassMark multi-thread (68574 vs 33978).

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

A: The 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor uses hyper-threading in these configurations.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The 270K Plus has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The 356H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The 270K Plus has a TDP of 125, while the 356H has a TDP of 25. This fivefold difference in power envelope helps explain the substantial performance gap.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The 270K Plus supports DDR5 only, while the 356H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, and only the 270K Plus supports ECC memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and use different manufacturing approaches, although both are built on a 3 nm process node. The 270K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename and is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, with a generation designation of Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake). The 356H uses the Panther Lake codename and architecture, belonging to Core Ultra Series 3 with a generation designation of Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H).

The foundry differs significantly. The 270K Plus is manufactured by TSMC, while the 356H is made by Intel. The 270K Plus has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm². The 356H has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

Cache hierarchies show notable differences. Both processors share a 192 KB L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs, with the 270K Plus offering 3 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core for the 356H. The L3 cache is also different, with the 270K Plus featuring 36 MB shared versus 18 MB shared for the 356H.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The 270K Plus is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851, while the 356H is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2540.

PCIe lanes show a difference in CPU-attached connectivity. The 270K Plus supports Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the 356H supports Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the 356H does not.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear differentiation between the two parts. The 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.70 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.50 GHz versus 4.70 GHz.

TDP is 125 for the 270K Plus and 25 for the 356H. The sockets differ, with the 270K Plus using Intel Socket 1851 and the 356H using Intel BGA 2540. The 270K Plus is a desktop part, while the 356H is a mobile part.

Memory support differs as noted: DDR5 only for the 270K Plus, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the 356H. ECC memory is supported on the 270K Plus but not on the 356H. PCIe lanes are 20 for the 270K Plus and 12 for the 356H, both Gen 5.

The integrated graphics differ in brand and execution unit count. The 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while the 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier; the 356H does not.

Release dates differ, with the 270K Plus launching on 2026-03-10 and the 356H launching on 2026-01-04. The 270K Plus has a launch MSRP of $299, while the 356H has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. The 17-0 sweep covers Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core, plus PassMark tests for data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multi-thread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance.

The 270K Plus is the clear choice for desktop workloads that demand high sustained performance. Its 125 TDP, 24 cores, and 5.50 GHz boost clock place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals in the database, including the Intel Xeon 6520P at 93786 average score, indicate that this part competes with server-class processors. The 270K Plus is particularly strong in multi-core rendering workloads, with its 140.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core representing the largest recorded delta.

The 356H, despite losing every head-to-head test, still demonstrates respectable absolute performance. Its 87th percentile ranking and average score of 41215 place it near the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 and Intel Core Ultra 7 366H in the database. The mobile part's 25 TDP and 16 cores make it suitable for power-constrained mobile environments, where the 270K Plus cannot operate due to its desktop socket and higher power requirements.

The 356H's closest rival data shows a tight grouping, with the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41208 (0% delta), the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at 41263 (-0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41376 (-0.4% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H at 40967 (0.6% delta). This suggests the 356H sits in a competitive mobile performance tier, even if it cannot match the desktop part.

In workloads where the 270K Plus shows its smallest lead, such as PassMark physics at 40.4% and Cinebench R15 single-core at 16.8%, the 356H's relative showing is better, but still not competitive. The data indicates that for users needing maximum compute throughput, the 270K Plus is the definitive choice. For mobile deployments where power efficiency and portability take priority, the 356H remains a viable option within its own segment, though the recorded benchmarks show no scenario where it outperforms the desktop part.