Intel Core Ultra X9 378H vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has an average benchmark score of 47468, placing it at the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Processor N150 scores 1025 on average, sitting at the 28th percentile. The Ultra X9 378H ranks near desktop-class parts like the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 and Intel Core i7-13700KF, while the N150 sits alongside older low-power mobile chips.

Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The largest recorded delta is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ultra X9 378H scores 32553 versus the N150's 2590.5, a difference of 1156.6%. This reflects the massive core-count and clock advantage of the higher-tier part.

Q: Does the Intel Processor N150 win any benchmark comparison?

A: No. Across all four head-to-head benchmark tests (Cinebench R15 and R23, both single-core and multi-core), the Ultra X9 378H wins every round. The N150 records zero wins in the head-to-head dataset.

Q: What is the difference in single-thread performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra X9 378H scores 4595 against the N150's 935, a 391.4% advantage. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the lead is 462 versus 153.15, a 201.7% gap. The Ultra X9 378H also posts a PassMark single-thread score of 4453, while the N150 has no recorded single-thread PassMark entry.

Q: How do the two processors differ in power envelope?

A: The Ultra X9 378H has a TDP of 25 watts, while the N150 is rated at 6 watts. This is a 19-watt difference, which explains the N150's suitability for fanless or ultra-low-power designs and the Ultra X9's need for active cooling.

Q: What are the memory and PCIe differences?

A: The Ultra X9 378H supports LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth and PCIe Gen 5 (4 CPU lanes). The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and PCIe Gen 3 (9 CPU lanes). The Ultra X9 has roughly four times the memory bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is built on Panther Lake-H architecture, using a 3 nm process node from Intel's own foundry. It belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation and carries the Panther Lake codename. The chip integrates 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its cache hierarchy consists of 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The integrated graphics are Arc B390, and the chip uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket. Memory support is limited to LPDDR5X, running dual-channel with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The part is marked as active production and was released in April 2026.

The Intel Processor N150 uses Twin Lake architecture, which is listed under the Alder Lake-N generation. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process, also by Intel. The chip has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. Cache is smaller: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730, and the socket is Intel BGA 1264. The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus, with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes. The part number is SRPNR, production status is active, and it was released in November 2024.

The architectural gap is substantial. The Ultra X9 uses a newer 3 nm node versus 10 nm, has four times the core count, and offers a 5.00 GHz boost clock versus 3.60 GHz. The cache differences are also large: 18 MB shared L3 versus 6 MB, and per-core L2 of 2.5 MB versus a shared 2 MB. The memory subsystem differs fundamentally, with dual-channel LPDDR5X versus single-channel mixed memory support. The PCIe generation is two steps apart, Gen 5 versus Gen 3. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers four Cinebench tests, and the Ultra X9 378H wins all of them. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Ultra X9 scores 462 versus the N150's 153.15, a 201.7% lead. This is still a threefold improvement in raw score. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra X9 posts 3281 against 422.5, a 676.6% gap. That multi-core result is more than seven times the N150's score.

The single-core lead grows in the newer Cinebench R23 test. The Ultra X9 scores 4595 versus 935 for the N150, a 391.4% delta. This indicates that the Ultra X9's newer architecture and higher boost clock translate into a larger advantage on modern workloads. The multi-core R23 gap is the most extreme: 32553 versus 2590.5, a 1156.6% difference. That is over twelve times the N150's multi-core output.

The broader benchmark data for the Ultra X9 shows strengths beyond Cinebench. Its PassMark multi-thread score is 38298, single-thread is 4453, integer math is 92603, floating-point math is 114500, and extended instructions score is 31315. Data compression scores 386591, encryption scores 29840, and random string sorting scores 44648. Physics testing yields 3404, and find prime numbers yields 357. The N150 has no recorded PassMark entries, so direct comparison in those workloads is not possible from the database.

In relative ranking terms, the Ultra X9's average score of 47468 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 (47527), 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13700KF (47330), 0.5% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T (47697), and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i9-12900F (47176). The N150's average of 1025 is within 0.1% of the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T (1024), 0.1% behind the Intel Core i3-4340 (1026), 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U (1024), and 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-5650U (1027). These deltas are all under one percent, indicating that each processor sits at a distinct performance tier.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H outperforms the Intel Processor N150 in every recorded benchmark category, with deltas ranging from 201.7% to 1156.6%. The Ultra X9's 89th percentile ranking versus the N150's 28th percentile places them in entirely different market segments. The Ultra X9 competes with high-end desktop and mobile parts like the Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 and Core i7-13700KF, while the N150 trades blows with decade-old desktop chips and low-power mobile parts.

The power envelope reinforces the split. The Ultra X9 draws 25 watts TDP, which is more than four times the N150's 6 watts. That power budget pays for 16 cores, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, 18 MB of L3 cache, and dual-channel LPDDR5X memory. The N150's 6-watt limit constrains it to 4 cores, a 3.60 GHz boost, 6 MB of L3, and single-channel memory. These are not competing products; they serve opposite ends of the mobile computing spectrum.

The N150's only advantages are qualitative. It uses a smaller physical package (BGA 1264 versus BGA 2540), supports a wider range of memory types (DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 versus LPDDR5X only), and has more PCIe lanes (9 Gen 3 lanes versus 4 Gen 5 lanes). For low-power embedded or basic mobile tasks, the N150 is a valid choice. For any performance-sensitive workload, the Ultra X9 is the only defensible option from the recorded data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Ultra X9 has 16 cores and 16 threads; the N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz versus 0.10 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.00 GHz versus 3.60 GHz. TDP is 25 watts versus 6 watts. The Ultra X9 uses the BGA 2540 socket; the N150 uses BGA 1264.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Ultra X9 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The N150 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. This means the Ultra X9 has more than double the per-core L1, a larger per-core L2 allocation, and three times the shared L3.

Memory support diverges. The Ultra X9 supports only LPDDR5X, dual-channel, with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, single-channel, with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra X9's memory bandwidth is exactly four times the N150's figure. PCIe is Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes on the Ultra X9, versus Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes on the N150. Integrated graphics are Arc B390 versus UHD Graphics 730. Process node is 3 nm versus 10 nm, and the codenames are Panther Lake versus Twin Lake.

Other differences: the Ultra X9 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation with a Panther Lake-H designation; the N150 is listed under the Alder Lake-N generation. The Ultra X9's part number is unknown, while the N150's is SRPNR. Both are active production, mobile segment, non-unlocked, and non-ECC.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins in every performance category recorded. For multi-threaded workloads, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32553 versus 2590.5 shows a twelvefold advantage. For single-threaded tasks, the R23 single-core score of 4595 versus 935 shows a fivefold lead. The Ultra X9 also holds all the PassMark records: 38298 multi-thread, 4453 single-thread, 114500 floating-point math, 92603 integer math, 386591 data compression, 29840 data encryption, 31315 extended instructions, 44648 random string sorting, 3404 physics, and 357 find prime numbers. The N150 has no entries in those tests, so the Ultra X9 wins by default wherever data exists.

The Intel Processor N150 wins only in attributes not measured by benchmark scores. Its 6-watt TDP is the lowest in this comparison, making it suitable for passively cooled or battery-constrained designs. It supports DDR4 memory in addition to DDR5 and LPDDR5, which broadens platform compatibility. Its 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes exceed the Ultra X9's 4 Gen 5 lanes in lane count, though the Ultra X9's lanes are faster. The N150's release date of November 2024 predates the Ultra X9's April 2026 launch, so it has a longer market presence. For workloads like basic web browsing, lightweight document editing, or embedded controller tasks, the N150's low power draw and memory flexibility are the relevant factors. For any computational task that shows up in a benchmark, the Ultra X9 is the clear winner.