Intel Core Ultra X9 378H vs Intel Processor N250 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no direct head-to-head comparison results between the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H and the Intel Processor N250. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the win counts for both processors are zero. This means there are no recorded side-by-side test scores from the same benchmark suite running on both CPUs under identical conditions.

However, the database does provide a substantial set of measurements for the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H. The Intel Processor N250 has no benchmark entries at all, so its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile rank among all CPUs is 50. The Core Ultra X9 378H, by contrast, sits at the 89th percentile across all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 47,468.

Looking at the Core Ultra X9 378H's individual scores, the Cinebench R23 multicore test returns 32,553 points, while the single-core test returns 4,595 points. In Cinebench R20, the multicore score is 13,672 and single-core is 1,929. The older Cinebench R15 shows 3,281 multicore and 462 single-core. PassMark results include a multithread score of 38,298, a single-thread score of 4,453, integer math at 92,603, floating-point math at 114,500, extended instructions at 31,315, data compression at 386,591, data encryption at 29,840, physics at 3,404, random string sorting at 44,648, and prime number finding at 357.

Because the Intel Processor N250 lacks any recorded benchmark scores, no direct comparison of exact numbers is possible. The data shows only that the Core Ultra X9 378H has an extensive benchmark profile, while the N250 has none. Any statement about relative performance must rely on the architectural and specification differences documented in the database, rather than on measured head-to-head results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use different process nodes. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H belongs to the Ultra X9 (Panther Lake-H) generation, with the codename Panther Lake, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Processor N250 belongs to the Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N) generation, with the codename Twin Lake, built on a 10 nm process, also at Intel.

The core counts differ sharply. The Core Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the N250 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Neither processor supports hyperthreading, based on the thread counts matching core counts. The Core Ultra X9 378H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The N250 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The base clock difference is extreme, though the boost clocks are closer in relative terms.

Cache hierarchies are also different. The Core Ultra X9 378H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The N250 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra X9 378H's L3 cache is three times larger than the N250's, and its per-core L2 allocation is substantially larger as well.

Memory support differs. The Core Ultra X9 378H supports LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel memory bus, with a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The N250 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 on a single-channel memory bus, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The bandwidth difference is a factor of four. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core Ultra X9 378H uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the N250 uses PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core Ultra X9 378H has Arc B390 graphics, while the N250 has UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra X9 378H is not multiplier-unlocked, and neither is the N250.

The Core Ultra X9 378H uses socket Intel BGA 2540, while the N250 uses socket Intel BGA 1264. Both are mobile market segment products and both have active production status. The Core Ultra X9 378H was released on 2026-04-03, while the N250 was released on 2025-01-06. The N250 has a known part number, SRPNS, while the Core Ultra X9 378H's part number is listed as unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra X9 378H wins in every area where the database has measurable data. Its 16 cores and 16 threads, 5.00 GHz boost clock, 18 MB L3 cache, dual-channel LPDDR5X memory with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, and Arc B390 graphics all point to a processor designed for high-throughput workloads. The recorded benchmark scores confirm this: Cinebench R23 multicore at 32,553, PassMark multithread at 38,298, and floating-point math at 114,500 are all strong figures.

The Intel Processor N250, with 4 cores, 4 threads, a 3.80 GHz boost clock, 6 MB L3 cache, single-channel memory with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 3, is positioned as a low-power mobile processor. Its 6 W TDP is a quarter of the Core Ultra X9 378H's 25 W TDP. The database shows no benchmark scores for the N250, so its wins cannot be enumerated. What the data does show is that the N250's architecture is far more modest in core count, cache, memory bandwidth, and PCIe generation.

Based on the recorded data, the Core Ultra X9 378H is the clear winner for multithreaded productivity, content creation, and any workload that scales across many cores. The N250, with its very low base clock of 0.10 GHz and 6 W TDP, would logically serve light tasks, but the database provides no measured evidence of its performance. The only recorded wins are for the Core Ultra X9 378H, and its wins are extensive across every benchmark category present.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. Core count: 16 versus 4. Thread count: 16 versus 4. Base clock: 2.00 GHz versus 0.10 GHz. Boost clock: 5.00 GHz versus 3.80 GHz. TDP: 25 W versus 6 W. Socket: Intel BGA 2540 versus Intel BGA 1264. Codename: Panther Lake versus Twin Lake. Generation: Ultra X9 (Panther Lake-H) versus Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N). Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm. L1 cache per core: 192 KB versus 96 KB. L2 cache: 2.5 MB per core versus 2 MB shared. L3 cache: 18 MB shared versus 6 MB shared. Memory support: LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5. Memory bus: dual-channel versus single-channel. Memory bandwidth: 153.6 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. PCIe: Gen 5, 4 lanes versus Gen 3, 9 lanes. Integrated graphics: Arc B390 versus UHD Graphics 730. Release date: 2026-04-03 versus 2025-01-06. Part number: unknown versus SRPNS.

Fields where the two match include manufacturer (Intel), foundry (Intel), ECC memory support (false for both), multiplier-unlocked status (false for both), market segment (mobile for both), and production status (active for both). Neither has a launch MSRP recorded, so no price comparison is possible.

The base clock difference is worth emphasizing. The Core Ultra X9 378H's base clock of 2.00 GHz is twenty times higher than the N250's 0.10 GHz. This is not a typo in the database; it reflects a very low idle or minimum clock design on the N250. The boost clock difference is more modest: 5.00 GHz versus 3.80 GHz, a 1.20 GHz gap.

The memory bandwidth gap is also substantial. At 153.6 GB/s, the Core Ultra X9 378H has four times the memory bandwidth of the N250's 38.4 GB/s. This directly affects any memory-bound workload. The L3 cache gap is threefold: 18 MB versus 6 MB. The core count gap is fourfold. All of these differences point to the Core Ultra X9 378H being in a completely different performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor N250 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Core Ultra X9 378H boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the N250 boosts to 3.80 GHz. The Core Ultra X9 378H also has a base clock of 2.00 GHz, compared to the N250's 0.10 GHz base clock.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The Core Ultra X9 378H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The N250 has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The Core Ultra X9 378H supports LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The N250 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 on a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Core Ultra X9 378H has a TDP of 25 W. The N250 has a TDP of 6 W.

Q: Are there any recorded benchmark scores for the N250?

A: No. The database shows no benchmark entries for the Intel Processor N250, and its average benchmark score is listed as 0. The Core Ultra X9 378H has a full set of Cinebench and PassMark scores, with an average benchmark score of 47,468.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core Ultra X9 378H uses Arc B390 graphics. The N250 uses UHD Graphics 730. The database does not provide graphics benchmark scores for either processor.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two processors into different tiers. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is a high-end mobile processor with 16 cores, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, 18 MB of L3 cache, dual-channel LPDDR5X memory at 153.6 GB/s, PCIe Gen 5, and Arc B390 graphics. It sits at the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 47,468. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 (average score 47,527, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i7-13700KF (average score 47,330, delta 0.3%), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T (average score 47,697, delta -0.5%), and the Intel Core i9-12900F (average score 47,176, delta 0.6%). These deltas are all under 1%, meaning the Core Ultra X9 378H performs essentially on par with those established desktop and mobile processors.

The Intel Processor N250 is a low-power mobile processor with 4 cores, a 3.80 GHz boost clock, 6 MB of L3 cache, single-channel memory at 38.4 GB/s, PCIe Gen 3, and UHD Graphics 730. Its 6 W TDP is the lowest in this comparison, and its 0.10 GHz base clock indicates a design focused on minimal power draw at idle. The database records no benchmark scores for it, placing it at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0.

For anyone choosing between these two, the decision is straightforward based on the recorded data. The Core Ultra X9 378H delivers measured performance in every benchmark category, with multicore and single-core scores that place it among the top 11% of all CPUs. The N250 offers no measured performance data at all. The Core Ultra X9 378H is the appropriate choice for workloads requiring high multithreaded throughput, fast memory access, and modern PCIe connectivity. The N250, with its much lower TDP and far fewer cores, would only be suitable for light, power-constrained tasks, but the database provides no evidence of its actual performance. The recorded data supports only one conclusion: the Core Ultra X9 378H is the superior processor in this comparison, and the N250 is an entirely different class of product with no benchmark results to justify any performance claim.