FindAlternative
Back to Intel Core Ultra 7 255H

Intel Core Ultra 7 255H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H

Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, ratings, and alternatives.

Compare
Intel Core Ultra 7 255H
Intel Core Ultra 7 255HHigh-performance hybrid processor for laptops
Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H
Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356HHigh-performance processor for desktop applications
Overview
Description

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is a high-performance hybrid processor designed for laptops, featuring a combination of Performance-cores (P-cores) and Efficiency-cores (E-cores) for efficient processing. With its advanced architecture and integrated graphics, this processor delivers fast performance and long battery life.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H is a high-performance processor with 16 cores, 18M cache, and up to 4.70 GHz frequency.

Pricing

Contact for Pricing

Category
Processors (CPUs)
Processors (CPUs)
Best for
Gamers, content creators, and professionals
Developers, gamers, content creators, and video editors.
Specifications
Spec source
Verified
Cache & Power
tdp
28W (base), 115W (max turbo)
25 W (base), 80 W (max turbo), 15 W (min assured)11%
cache
24MB+33%
18 MB Intel Smart Cache
process node
TSMC N3B (3nm)
Intel 18A
Core & Clock
cores
16 (6P + 8E + 2LP)
16 (4P + 8E + 4LP)
threads
16
16
base clock
2.0 GHz (P-core)+5%
1.9 GHz (Performance-core), 1.5 GHz (Efficient-core), 1.5 GHz (Low Power Efficient-core)
boost clock
5.1 GHz+9%
4.7 GHz (Performance-core), 3.5 GHz (Efficient-core), 3.3 GHz (Low Power Efficient-core)
General
socket
FCBGA2049
FCBGA2540
release date
2025-Q1
2026-01-01
benchmark score
Graphics & Memory
integrated graphics
Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe-cores, up to 2.25 GHz)
Intel Graphics
Specifications
npu performance
50 TOPS (NPU)
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • High-performance processing
  • Efficient processing with low power consumption
  • Advanced security features
  • Integrated graphics with AI-enhanced capabilities
  • High-performance processing
  • High cache memory
  • High frequency
  • Supports multiple threads
Cons
  • Limited availability
  • High cost
  • Thermal management challenges
  • Limited software optimization
  • High power consumption
  • Requires advanced cooling systems
  • May require additional hardware support
Community & Metrics
Upvotes
0
0
User rating
Not enough data
Not enough data

More alternatives & similar tools

Alternatives to Intel Core Ultra 7 255H

View all →
Intel Core Ultra 7 356H
Intel Core Ultra 7 356H

High-performance mobile processor with 16 cores

Compare
AMD Ryzen 7 8840U
AMD Ryzen 7 8840U

Powerful 8-core processor for laptops

Compare
Intel Core Ultra 9 285H
Intel Core Ultra 9 285H

A high-performance mobile processor designed for gamers and demanding creators.

Compare
Apple M4
Apple M4

A revolutionary CPU redefining power and efficiency with a cutting-edge 3nm process.

Compare

Alternatives to Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H

View all →
Intel Core Ultra 7 356H
Intel Core Ultra 7 356H

High-performance mobile processor with 16 cores

Compare
Intel Core Ultra 9 285H
Intel Core Ultra 9 285H

A high-performance mobile processor designed for gamers and demanding creators.

Compare
Intel Core Ultra 7 255H
Intel Core Ultra 7 255H

High-performance hybrid processor for laptops

Compare
Intel Core i9 processor 14900K
Intel Core i9 processor 14900K

Unleash Extreme Performance

Compare

The Verdict

AI-generated from listing data

Product B offers higher boost clocks and newer 3nm efficiency, while Product A provides larger cache and lower base power; choose B for peak speed, A for balanced desktop workloads.

Key differences

  • Boost clock: B reaches 5.1 GHz vs A’s 4.7 GHz (P‑cores).
  • Process node: B uses 3 nm TSMC N3B, A uses Intel 18A (larger).
  • Cache: A has 18 MB vs B’s 24 MB (larger cache may benefit data‑intensive apps).
  • TDP range: A 25 W‑80 W, B 28 W‑115 W (B can draw more power for performance).
  • Integrated graphics: A uses Intel Graphics (unspecified), B has Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe‑cores, 2.25 GHz).
DimensionWinner

Performance

Higher boost clock (5.1 GHz) and 3 nm node give B superior single‑thread and peak performance.

Intel Core Ultra 7 255H

Build quality

Both use BGA sockets (FCBGA2540 vs FCBGA2049) and similar core counts; no clear advantage.

Tie

Connectivity

No connectivity details provided for either; cannot differentiate.

Tie

Power & efficiency

A’s lower base TDP (25 W) and lower max turbo (80 W) consume less power than B’s 115 W peak.

Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H

Compatibility

A targets desktop platforms (FCBGA2540), likely broader motherboard options than B’s laptop‑only socket.

Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H

Price & value

Pricing not specified for either; value cannot be assessed.

Tie

Warranty & support

No warranty or support information provided for either product.

Tie

Choose Intel Core Ultra 7 255H if…

Laptop gamers or content creators prioritizing peak speed and AI‑enhanced graphics, willing to manage higher heat.

Choose Intel Core Ultra 7 Processor 356H if…

Desktop developers or creators needing stable power and larger cache, with existing cooling solutions.

Common questions

Which processor delivers higher single‑core performance?

Product B, with a 5.1 GHz boost clock versus Product A’s 4.7 GHz.

Will the higher TDP of Product B require special cooling?

Yes, B can reach 115 W turbo, which typically needs advanced laptop cooling solutions.

Is the integrated graphics performance better on Product B?

Product B includes Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe‑cores, up to 2.25 GHz), which is specified, while Product A’s graphics are unspecified.