Intel Core Ultra 7 366H vs Intel Processor U303L Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H and the Intel Processor U303L represent different tiers of Intel's mobile lineup. The benchmark data available in the database is one-sided: the Ultra 7 366H has a full suite of recorded measurements, while the U303L has no benchmark entries at all. This absence of data for the U303L means a direct score-by-score comparison is impossible. Instead, the analysis must rely on the Ultra 7 366H's performance profile and its position among nearest rivals, alongside the architectural and specification gaps between the two processors.

For the Ultra 7 366H, the recorded Cinebench results establish a clear multi-core strength. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 28,477 points, while the single-core score is 4,020 points. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 11,960 points with a single-core score of 1,688. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 2,870 points in multi-core and 405 in single-core. These figures indicate a processor that scales well across all cores, with the multi-core advantage being substantially larger than the single-core margin. The R23 multi-core figure is roughly seven times the single-core figure, which aligns with a 16-core, 16-thread configuration operating under a 25 W TDP.

PassMark results for the Ultra 7 366H reinforce this pattern. The multithread score is 33,429, while the single-thread score is 4,043. The integer math test yields 83,695 points, and floating point math reaches 103,615 points. Data compression scores 327,455, while data encryption scores 25,845. Extended instructions (SIMD-heavy workloads) produce 26,901 points. Random string sorting reaches 39,814, and the physics test scores 2,880. The find prime numbers test is comparatively modest at 326 points, which is typical for a workload that stresses latency and branch prediction rather than raw throughput. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 41,263.

In the nearest rivals table, the Ultra 7 366H sits within a very tight cluster. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores an average of 41,215, a delta of 0.1 percent relative to the 366H. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 41,208, also a 0.1 percent delta. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41,376, which is 0.3 percent higher than the 366H. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H scores 40,967, a 0.7 percent deficit. These deltas are all within one percent, meaning the 366H is effectively performance-equivalent to its closest competitors in aggregate benchmark scores. The 366H holds an 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, placing it well above the median but not at the extreme top tier.

The U303L, by contrast, has no benchmark scores recorded. Its percentile ranking is 50, and its average benchmark score is listed as zero. Without recorded measurements, there is no empirical basis to state how it performs in any specific workload. The data shows a processor that sits at the median of the database distribution solely by its specification profile, not by measured results.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the only one of the two with a measurable performance profile. Its 87th percentile ranking and average score of 41,263 place it in the upper tier of the database. The U303L, with no benchmarks and a 50th percentile ranking, cannot be positioned against the 366H with any numerical precision. The 366H's nearest rivals all fall within 0.7 percent of its average score, confirming that its performance class is consistent with other mid-to-high mobile processors in the same generation.

For workloads that rely on multi-core throughput, the 366H's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,477 and PassMark multithread score of 33,429 are the strongest indicators in the dataset. For single-threaded tasks, the R23 single-core score of 4,020 and PassMark single-thread score of 4,043 show a capable, if less dominant, showing. The U303L offers no such data, so any claim about its performance would be unsupported by the database.

The choice between these two processors, from the available information, depends entirely on whether the U303L's lower TDP and different architecture meet a specific need that the 366H cannot. The 366H uses 25 W versus 15 W for the U303L, and the 366H has a newer process node, more cores, and higher clock speeds. The U303L does have a recorded launch MSRP of $285, which is the only pricing data in the pack. No performance data exists to justify that price difference or to suggest which processor delivers better results per dollar, so no such conclusion is drawn here.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor U303L has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of the two processors?

A: The Ultra 7 366H boosts to 4.80 GHz. The U303L boosts to 2.60 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The U303L has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Ultra 7 366H has a TDP of 25 W. The U303L has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Ultra 7 366H?

A: The Ultra 7 366H has an average benchmark score of 41,263. The U303L has no recorded benchmark scores, with an average score of zero.

Q: How does the Ultra 7 366H compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X?

A: The Ultra 7 366H scores 41,263 on average, while the Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41,376. The delta is 0.3 percent in favor of the Ryzen 9 5900X, a negligible difference.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The Ultra 7 366H uses 16 cores and 16 threads, while the U303L uses 5 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for the 366H and 1.20 GHz for the U303L. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz versus 2.60 GHz. TDP is 25 W for the 366H and 15 W for the U303L.

The sockets are different: the 366H uses Intel BGA 2540, while the U303L uses Intel Socket 1700. The 366H supports PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only), whereas the U303L supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Memory support also diverges: the 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the U303L supports DDR4 and DDR5. The 366H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s; the U303L has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the U303L uses UHD Graphics 96EU. The cache hierarchy shows the 366H with 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, versus 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core for the U303L. The 366H also carries a larger shared L3 at 18 MB compared to 12 MB.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Ultra 7 366H is built on Panther Lake architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 3, and uses a 3 nm process node. The U303L is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS variant, and uses a 10 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process difference alone indicates a generational leap for the 366H.

The 366H's generation is listed as "Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H)", while the U303L's generation is "Intel Processor (Raptor Lake)". The 366H was released with a 2026 date, whereas the U303L has a 2024 release date. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The 366H's part number is SA4R9Q9EL, and the U303L's is SRPKEQ5CV.

Cache organization also differs architecturally. The 366H provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, which is typical for a newer high-core-count design. The U303L provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. The 366H's 18 MB shared L3 is 50 percent larger than the U303L's 12 MB. The 366H's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, combined with LPDDR5X support, points to a design aimed at higher throughput than the U303L's DDR4/DDR5 support without a recorded bandwidth figure.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 7 366H wins in every category where the database has recorded measurements. Its multi-core performance, as shown by the Cinebench R23 score of 28,477 and PassMark multithread score of 33,429, is the strongest evidence of its capability. The 16-core, 16-thread configuration with a 4.80 GHz boost clock and 25 W TDP positions it for sustained multi-threaded workloads such as rendering, compilation, and scientific computation. The single-thread score of 4,043 in PassMark and 4,020 in Cinebench R23 indicate that it also handles lightly threaded tasks well, though the single-core results are not as dominant relative to its peers as the multi-core results.

The U303L has no wins in the recorded data because no benchmark scores exist for it. Its advantages are structural rather than measured: a lower TDP of 15 W, a smaller 5-core, 6-thread configuration, and support for DDR4 memory in addition to DDR5. The 10 nm Raptor Lake architecture and Intel Socket 1700 compatibility may suit systems that require those specific platform attributes. The recorded launch MSRP of $285 is the only financial data point, and no performance data exists to weigh against it.

The 366H's nearest rival comparisons show that even among its closest competitors, the performance differences are minimal. The largest delta is 0.7 percent against the Core Ultra X7 358H, and the only rival that surpasses it, the Ryzen 9 5900X, does so by just 0.3 percent. This places the 366H at the center of a competitive performance band rather than at the top or bottom. For the U303L, the absence of rival data and benchmark scores means the database offers no basis for a similar comparative statement.