Intel Core Ultra 7 366H vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H, which wins 15 of the 17 recorded benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V. The average benchmark score for the 366H is 41263, compared to 23219 for the 288V, placing the 366H in the 87th percentile of all CPUs while the 288V sits in the 76th percentile.

The largest margin comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the 366H scores 28477 against the 288V's 10178, a delta of 179.8%. This is the single biggest gap in the entire comparison and reflects the fundamental difference in core configuration between the two parts. The 366H continues its multi-core dominance in Cinebench R20, scoring 11960 versus 7069, a 69.2% advantage, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 2870 against 1583, a 81.3% lead.

Integer math shows the largest PassMark gap. The 366H posts 83695, while the 288V manages 44019, a 90.1% difference. Data encryption follows closely, with the 366H at 25845 versus 14141, a 82.8% edge. Data compression favors the 366H by 75.6%, with scores of 327455 against 186521. Floating point math delivers a 74% advantage for the 366H, scoring 103615 versus 59536.

Single-core Cinebench results also lean heavily toward the 366H. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 366H scores 4020 against the 288V's 1950, a 106.2% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 69.3% advantage (1688 versus 997), and Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 34.3% edge (405 versus 301.5).

The only two wins for the 288V come from PassMark single-thread tests, where it scores 4274 versus the 366H's 4043, a 5.4% advantage. This appears in both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries, which record identical values. Notably, this single-thread PassMark win does not translate into Cinebench single-core victories, where the 366H is ahead across all three Cinebench versions.

Other PassMark subtests all favor the 366H. Extended instructions show a 72.3% lead (26901 versus 15613), random string sorting shows a 76% advantage (39814 versus 22622), physics scores 2880 against 1637 for a 75.9% edge, find prime numbers returns 326 versus 195 for a 67.2% lead, and multithread scores 33429 against 19810, a 68.7% difference.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads. Its 16 cores and 16 threads deliver massive parallel processing capability, reflected in the 179.8% Cinebench R23 multi-core lead and the 90.1% integer math advantage. Rendering, video encoding, scientific computation, and any task that scales across cores will strongly favor the 366H. The data also shows its superiority in encryption workloads, with an 82.8% lead in data encryption, making it the better option for security-related processing.

The 366H also wins in mixed workloads that combine single-thread responsiveness with multi-core throughput. Its Cinebench single-core results are consistently higher than the 288V across R15, R20, and R23, with deltas ranging from 34.3% to 106.2%. This means even lightly threaded applications, such as older software or certain productivity tools, will run faster on the 366H despite its lower PassMark single-thread score.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has a narrower set of advantages. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4274 exceeds the 366H's 4043, indicating slightly better raw single-thread performance in that specific benchmark suite. This could translate to a minor edge in certain latency-sensitive, single-threaded PassMark workloads. However, this advantage does not extend to the Cinebench suite, where the 366H dominates.

The 288V also offers a higher memory bandwidth figure of 136.5 GB/s, versus 115.2 GB/s for the 366H. While no direct memory bandwidth benchmark is recorded in this comparison, the specification suggests the 288V may have an advantage in memory-bound scenarios if software can utilize the extra bandwidth. The 288V's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz, compared to 4.80 GHz for the 366H, provides additional headroom for burst workloads, though the benchmark data shows this does not translate into superior Cinebench performance.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28477 versus 10178 for the 288V, a 179.8% advantage. Across all recorded multi-threaded benchmarks, the 366H leads by margins ranging from 67.2% to 179.8%.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 4274 versus 4043 for the 366H, a 5.4% edge. This result appears twice in the recorded data with identical values.

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

A: The 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Both lack hyper-threading, as thread counts equal core counts.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: Both processors share the same per-core L1 cache at 192 KB and per-core L2 cache at 2.5 MB. The L3 cache differs: the 366H has 18 MB shared, while the 288V has 12 MB shared.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speeds?

A: The 288V has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 366H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Despite lower clocks, the 366H wins all Cinebench single-core tests.

Q: What are the percentile rankings of each CPU?

A: The 366H ranks in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the 288V ranks in the 76th percentile. The 366H's average benchmark score is 41263, and the 288V's is 23219.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The 366H uses 16 cores and 16 threads, while the 288V uses 8 cores and 8 threads. The 366H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the 288V has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 366H carries a TDP of 25, while the 288V carries a TDP of 30.

Memory support differs as well. The 366H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the 288V supports only LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the memory bandwidth differs: 115.2 GB/s for the 366H versus 136.5 GB/s for the 288V. Neither supports ECC memory.

PCIe lanes differ significantly. The 366H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while the 288V provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the 288V uses Arc 140V.

The sockets are different. The 366H uses Intel BGA 2540, while the 288V uses Intel BGA 2833. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates differ, with the 288V released earlier and the 366H released later. Part numbers also differ between the two units.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use a 3 nm process node, but they come from different foundries. The 366H is manufactured by Intel, while the 288V is manufactured by TSMC. The 366H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 with the Panther Lake architecture and the Panther Lake-H generation. The 288V belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 with the Lunar Lake architecture and the Lunar Lake generation.

The cache hierarchy differs only at the L3 level. Both share 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core. The 366H has 18 MB shared L3, while the 288V has 12 MB shared L3. This gives the 366H 50% more shared L3 cache, which contributes to its multi-threaded performance advantage.

The 366H's Panther Lake architecture uses a 16-core design without hyper-threading, while the 288V's Lunar Lake architecture uses an 8-core design also without hyper-threading. The core count difference is the primary architectural driver behind the 366H's dominant multi-core benchmark results. The 288V compensates with higher clock speeds and higher memory bandwidth, but the benchmark data shows these advantages cannot overcome the 366H's core count superiority.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the superior processor according to the recorded data. It wins 15 of 17 benchmark comparisons, holds a 87th percentile ranking versus the 288V's 76th, and delivers an average benchmark score of 41263, nearly double the 288V's 23219. The 366H's 16-core configuration provides overwhelming multi-threaded performance, with Cinebench R23 multi-core showing a 179.8% lead. Even in single-core Cinebench tests, where the 288V has higher clock speeds, the 366H wins by margins of 34.3% to 106.2%.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V offers only one meaningful advantage: a higher PassMark single-thread score of 4274 versus 4043. It also has higher memory bandwidth at 136.5 GB/s and a higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz, but these specifications do not produce benchmark wins in the recorded data outside of the PassMark single-thread test.

For workloads that benefit from multiple cores, such as rendering, compilation, data processing, and encryption, the 366H is the clear choice based on benchmark results. The 288V should be considered only for scenarios where the specific PassMark single-thread advantage matters, and even then, the 366H's Cinebench single-core results suggest the 288V's lead may not generalize across all single-threaded applications. The data consistently favors the 366H across the vast majority of recorded tests.