Intel Core Ultra 9 285T vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T, which wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The 285T posts an average benchmark score of 51,310, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H averages 40,967 and sits in the 87th percentile. The 285T is the clear choice for desktop users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput, particularly in rendering and mathematical workloads, where its 24 cores and 24 threads provide a substantial edge over the 16-core, 16-thread 358H. The 358H, however, is a mobile part designed for a different physical environment, and its single recorded win in PassMark physics (3,021 versus 2,842, a 5.9% advantage) shows it can hold its own in a specific simulation-style task. For users constrained to a laptop chassis with a lower power envelope, the 358H remains a capable processor, but the data does not support choosing it for raw performance when the 285T is an option.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different Intel Core Ultra series generations. The 285T is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, and is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It houses 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The 358H is from the Core Ultra Series 3, uses the Panther Lake codename with the Panther Lake-H generation tag, and is also built on a 3 nm process, but at Intel's own foundry. The database does not list transistor count or die size for the 358H, so those figures are not available for comparison.

Cache organization differs significantly. Both parts share the same per-core L1 (192 KB) and per-core L2 (3 MB) allocation, but the shared L3 cache is exactly double on the 285T at 36 MB versus 18 MB on the 358H. This larger shared cache likely contributes to the 285T's advantage in data-heavy workloads. Memory support also diverges: the 285T uses DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the 358H uses LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with a higher 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The 358H's memory bandwidth is 50% higher, which is notable for a mobile part, though it does not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded tests. ECC memory support is present on the 285T but absent on the 358H. PCIe lane counts differ as well, with the 285T offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only) versus the 358H's Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the 285T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU, while the 358H uses Arc B390.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single-core delta appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 285T scores 4,739 against the 358H's 2,080, a 127.8% advantage. That is the most extreme gap in the entire dataset. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows a similar pattern, with the 285T at 477 versus 301.5, a 58.2% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 17.4% lead (1,990 versus 1,695). In multi-core Cinebench tests, the 285T leads by 11.8% in R15 (3,384 versus 3,027), 17.4% in R20 (14,100 versus 12,011), and a massive 79.1% in R23 (33,573 versus 18,747). The R23 multi-core result is the second-largest margin recorded and reflects the 285T's core count and clock advantage.

PassMark integer math shows a 59.3% win for the 285T (132,433 versus 83,147), and floating-point math shows a 32.8% win (137,923 versus 103,842). Data compression favors the 285T by 15.5% (384,140 versus 332,508), and data encryption by 23.1% (32,061 versus 26,046). Random string sorting goes to the 285T by 18.2% (47,695 versus 40,357), and multithread by 18.1% (39,931 versus 33,802). The extended instructions test is nearly a dead heat, with the 285T ahead by just 0.7% (27,477 versus 27,274). Find prime numbers also favors the 285T, but only by 2.4% (345 versus 337). Single-thread PassMark shows an 11% lead for the 285T (4,576 versus 4,124).

The single win for the 358H comes in PassMark physics, where it scores 3,021 against 2,842, a 5.9% margin. That is the only test where the 358H demonstrates superiority, and it is an isolated result rather than part of a broader trend. The 285T's average benchmark score of 51,310 also places it ahead of its nearest rivals: it is 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900T (51,015), 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13850HX (50,761), and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT (50,718). It trails the Intel Core i9-13900F by 0.8% (51,730). The 358H sits within a tight cluster of mobile rivals: it is 0.6% behind the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41,208) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (41,215), and 0.7% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H (41,263), while leading the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G by 0.6% (40,718).

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every physical and electrical specification. The 285T has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clock is 1.40 GHz on the 285T versus 1.90 GHz on the 358H, but boost clock is 5.40 GHz on the 285T versus 4.80 GHz on the 358H. Thermal design power is 35 watts for the 285T and 25 watts for the 358H. Socket types are incompatible: the 285T uses Intel Socket 1851, while the 358H uses Intel BGA 2540, reflecting the desktop versus mobile segmentation. The 285T's market segment is Desktop; the 358H's is Mobile. Release dates differ by nearly a year: the 285T launched on 2025-01-06, while the 358H launched on 2026-01-04. The 285T carries a launch MSRP of $549; the database records no launch MSRP for the 358H. Both processors have locked multipliers. Part numbers are SRQD3 for the 285T and SA4RAQ9ET for the 358H. Both are listed as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 285T scores 4,739 versus 2,080 for the 358H, a 127.8% advantage.

Q: Does the mobile processor win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the 358H wins the PassMark physics test, scoring 3,021 against the 285T's 2,842, a 5.9% margin. This is its only win out of 17 recorded tests.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The 358H supports LPDDR5X with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, which is higher than the 285T's DDR5 at 102.4 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Are these processors on the same manufacturing node?

A: Both are built on a 3 nm process, but the 285T is manufactured at TSMC, while the 358H is manufactured at Intel.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The 285T averages 51,310 across all benchmark results, while the 358H averages 40,967. The 285T sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs; the 358H sits in the 87th percentile.