Intel Core Ultra 7 356H vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H and Intel Core Ultra X7 368H are both 16-core Panther Lake mobile processors built on Intel's 3nm node, yet they produce sharply different benchmark profiles. The 356H wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests and posts a higher average benchmark score of 41215, while the 368H counters with dominant wins in Cinebench R23 and single-core R15. Both chips sit at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database, but the 356H is the more consistent all-rounder.

The Verdict

The 356H is the safer choice for a broad mix of mobile workloads. It wins the majority of head-to-head tests, including PassMark multithread, data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, random string sorting, physics, and single-thread. Its average benchmark score of 41215 is 1.7% higher than the 368H's 40518, and it matches the 368H's 87th percentile ranking. The 356H also sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41376) and within 0.1% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H (41263), showing it is tightly clustered with strong desktop and mobile parts.

The 368H is the pick when Cinebench R23 performance is the priority. It leads the 356H by 34.8% in R23 multi-core (28221 vs 18395) and by 48.8% in R23 single-core (3984 vs 2040). It also wins R15 single-core by 24.4% (401 vs 303) and takes floating-point math and integer math by 2.4% and 5.6% respectively. For users whose workload is dominated by R23-style rendering or single-threaded R15, the 368H is the clear choice. For everyone else, the 356H's broader set of wins makes it the more dependable processor.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design. They are Panther Lake parts on Intel's 3nm node, with 16 cores, 16 threads, a 25W TDP, and the Intel BGA 2540 socket. The cache hierarchy is identical: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Both are dual-channel, lack ECC support, have locked multipliers, and share the same release date.

The differences are in clocks, memory, PCIe, and graphics. The 356H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, while the 368H runs at 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The 368H's higher clocks directly explain its single-core and R23 wins. Memory support also differs: the 356H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the 368H supports only LPDDR5X. The 368H compensates with a higher memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s for the 356H. The PCIe configuration is reversed in favor of the 356H, which has 12 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) versus 4 Gen 5 lanes for the 368H. The integrated graphics differ as well: the 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the 368H uses Arc B390.

These architectural choices explain the benchmark split. The 368H's higher boost clock and memory bandwidth give it an edge in memory-sensitive and single-threaded workloads. The 356H's wider PCIe allocation and DDR5 support make it more flexible for systems with multiple NVMe drives or discrete GPUs, even though its raw compute clocks are lower.

Where Each One Wins

The 356H wins 12 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. Its wins include Cinebench R15 multi-core (3055 vs 2844, 7.4% ahead), R20 multi-core (12153 vs 11852, 2.5%), R20 single-core (1715 vs 1673, 2.5%), PassMark data compression (336177 vs 312927, 7.4%), data encryption (26345 vs 25228, 4.4%), extended instructions (27898 vs 25669, 8.7%), find prime numbers (327 vs 321, 1.9%), multithread (33978 vs 32956, 3.1%), physics (2895 vs 2857, 1.3%), random string sorting (40990 vs 38093, 7.6%), and both PassMark single-thread entries (4072 vs 4005, 1.7%). This is a broad set of wins across compression, encryption, sorting, and general throughput.

The 368H wins 5 tests, but they are decisive. It takes Cinebench R15 single-core (401 vs 303, 24.4% ahead), R23 multi-core (28221 vs 18395, 34.8%), R23 single-core (3984 vs 2040, 48.8%), floating-point math (105681 vs 103128, 2.4%), and integer math (88083 vs 83111, 5.6%). The 368H is the specialist for rendering and math-heavy workloads, while the 356H is the generalist.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The 356H wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the 368H wins 5.

Q: Which has higher single-core performance?

A: It depends on the test. The 368H leads R15 single-core by 24.4% and R23 single-core by 48.8%, but the 356H leads PassMark single-thread by 1.7%.

Q: Which has more memory bandwidth?

A: The 368H, at 153.6 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s for the 356H.

Q: Which has more PCIe lanes?

A: The 356H, with 12 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) versus 4 Gen 5 lanes for the 368H.

Q: Are they on the same process node?

A: Yes, both are 3nm Panther Lake parts from Intel.

Q: Which has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The 356H, at 41215 versus 40518 for the 368H, a 1.7% gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 368H's largest win is Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 3984 against 2040, a 48.8% margin. R23 multi-core is next at 28221 versus 18395, 34.8% ahead. R15 single-core goes to the 368H at 401 versus 303, 24.4% ahead. The 368H also wins floating-point math (105681 vs 103128, 2.4%) and integer math (88083 vs 83111, 5.6%).

The 356H's biggest win is PassMark extended instructions at 27898 versus 25669, 8.7% ahead. Random string sorting follows at 40990 versus 38093, 7.6%. R15 multi-core and data compression are both 7.4% wins (3055 vs 2844 and 336177 vs 312927). Data encryption is 4.4% (26345 vs 25228), multithread is 3.1% (33978 vs 32956), and R20 multi-core and single-core are both 2.5% (12153 vs 11852 and 1715 vs 1673). The 356H also takes PassMark single-thread by 1.7% (4072 vs 4005), find prime numbers by 1.9% (327 vs 321), and physics by 1.3% (2895 vs 2857).

The pattern is clear: the 368H wins where clocks and memory bandwidth matter most, while the 356H wins the broader set of throughput and utility tests.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core Ultra 7 356H | Intel Core Ultra X7 368H |

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

| Base clock | 1.90 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

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

| PCIe | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics | Arc B390 |

| Part number | SA4RGQ9EU | SA4R7Q9EJ |

| Generation label | Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H) | Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H) |

All other recorded specifications match: 16 cores, 16 threads, 25W TDP, Intel BGA 2540 socket, Panther Lake architecture, 3nm process, 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, 18 MB shared L3, dual-channel memory bus, no ECC, locked multiplier, active production status, and the same release date.