Intel Core Ultra X9 378H vs Intel Processor 300T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H and Intel Processor 300T occupy entirely different performance tiers. The Core Ultra X9 378H delivers heavy multi-threaded throughput with 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T is a 2-core, 4-thread desktop part aimed at basic computing. Benchmark results confirm this split: the Core Ultra X9 378H sits at the 89th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Processor 300T lands at the 50th percentile.

The Core Ultra X9 378H wins every category where parallel processing matters. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32553 dwarfs anything a 2-core part could produce. The Intel Processor 300T has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, meaning all head-to-head comparisons rely on architectural and specification data rather than measured results.

The Intel Processor 300T wins in one specific area: platform simplicity and connectivity. It uses the Intel Socket 1700, offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Core Ultra X9 378H uses Intel BGA 2540, provides 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), and supports LPDDR5X exclusively. For desktop builders needing broad memory compatibility and more PCIe lanes, the Intel Processor 300T is the more flexible option.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel manufacturing generations. The Core Ultra X9 378H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process, fabricated by Intel. The Intel Processor 300T uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, also fabricated by Intel. This process gap directly influences transistor density and power characteristics.

Core counts differ dramatically. The Core Ultra X9 378H packs 16 cores with 16 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T has just 2 cores and 4 threads. The Core Ultra X9 378H features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300T offers 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Clock speeds show a different strategy. The Intel Processor 300T runs at a 3.40 GHz base clock with no boost clock listed. The Core Ultra X9 378H starts at 2.00 GHz base but boosts to 5.00 GHz. The higher boost ceiling on the Core Ultra X9 378H allows it to reach peak single-thread performance despite the lower base clock.

Memory support diverges significantly. The Core Ultra X9 378H uses LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The Intel Processor 300T supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory but has no bandwidth figure recorded. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core Ultra X9 378H includes Arc B390 graphics, while the Intel Processor 300T ships with UHD Graphics 710. The Arc B390 is positioned for more demanding visual workloads, while UHD Graphics 710 targets basic display output.

Physical specifications also separate the two. The Intel Processor 300T has a recorded die size of 163 mm². The Core Ultra X9 378H has no die size listed. The Intel Processor 300T carries part number SRN3K, while the Core Ultra X9 378H has an unknown part number.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two processors. The Intel Processor 300T has zero recorded benchmark scores, which prevents any measured performance delta calculation. The Core Ultra X9 378H, however, has an extensive benchmark profile that places it among strong desktop and mobile parts.

The Core Ultra X9 378H records an average benchmark score of 47468. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 with an average score of 47527 (a delta of -0.1%), the Intel Core i7-13700KF with 47330 (a delta of 0.3%), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T with 47697 (a delta of -0.5%), and the Intel Core i9-12900F with 47176 (a delta of 0.6%). These tight deltas show the Core Ultra X9 378H performs within 0.6% of several established high-end processors.

Individual benchmark scores for the Core Ultra X9 378H demonstrate consistent strength. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3281 multi-core and 462 single-core. Cinebench R20 shows 13672 multi-core and 1929 single-core. Cinebench R23 delivers 32553 multi-core and 4595 single-core. PassMark tests show 386591 in data compression, 29840 in data encryption, 31315 in extended instructions, 357 in find prime numbers, 114500 in floating point math, 92603 in integer math, 38298 in multithread, 3404 in physics, 44648 in random string sorting, and 4453 in single thread.

These numbers indicate a processor that handles both heavily threaded workloads and single-thread tasks with high efficiency. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4595 suggests strong per-core performance, enabled by the 5.00 GHz boost clock. The multithread PassMark score of 38298 confirms the 16-core design scales well across parallel tasks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra X9 378H | Intel Processor 300T |

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

| Cores | 16 | 2 |

| Threads | 16 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | None listed |

| TDP | 25 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2540 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Panther Lake | Raptor Lake-S |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | Not listed | 163 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | Not listed |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc B390 | UHD Graphics 710 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-04-03 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $82 |

The TDP figures show an interesting inversion. The Intel Processor 300T draws 35 W despite having only 2 cores, while the Core Ultra X9 378H draws 25 W with 16 cores. This reflects the efficiency gains from the 3 nm process node used in the Panther Lake design. The Intel Processor 300T's 10 nm process requires more power per core, and its higher base clock of 3.40 GHz contributes to the increased TDP.

The release dates place these products in different eras. The Intel Processor 300T launched on 2024-01-07, while the Core Ultra X9 378H arrived on 2026-04-03. The two-year gap explains the process node advantage and architectural improvements in the newer part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H boosts to 5.00 GHz. The Intel Processor 300T has no boost clock listed in the database, only a 3.40 GHz base clock.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Processor 300T supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H supports only LPDDR5X.

Q: How does the L3 cache compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300T has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What PCIe configurations do they offer?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Processor 300T provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has a TDP of 25 W. The Intel Processor 300T has a TDP of 35 W.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two processors by intended use case. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is a mobile processor with Panther Lake architecture, designed for high-performance laptops where multi-threaded throughput and energy efficiency matter. Its 16 cores, 18 MB of L3 cache, 5.00 GHz boost clock, and 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suitable for demanding productivity workloads, content creation, and scientific computing. The 89th percentile ranking places it among the top tier of all CPUs in the database.

The Intel Processor 300T serves as an entry-level desktop processor. Its 2 cores and 4 threads handle basic computing tasks, and its support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory provides flexibility for budget desktop builds. The 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes offer more expansion capability than the Core Ultra X9 378H's 4 lanes. The launch MSRP of $82 positions it as an accessible desktop option, though the database does not record any benchmark scores for this part.

Benchmark data favors the Core Ultra X9 378H overwhelmingly. Its average benchmark score of 47468 places it alongside the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, Intel Core i7-13700KF, Intel Core Ultra 7 265T, and Intel Core i9-12900F, all within 0.6% of each other. The Intel Processor 300T has no recorded scores, so its performance cannot be quantified against the Core Ultra X9 378H.

Buyers needing a mobile processor with high multi-core performance should select the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H. Desktop users with modest computing needs and a preference for DDR4 or DDR5 memory compatibility should consider the Intel Processor 300T. The two parts do not compete in the same market segment, and the specification data confirms they serve different purposes.