Ultra 7 265 vs Ryzen 3 3350U
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 7 265 outperforms Ryzen 3 3350U by a whopping 700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1516 | 153 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 67.28 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Picasso (Ryzen 3000 APU) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 23.14 | 42.71 |
| Architecture codename | Zen+ (2018−2019) | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 6 January 2019 (6 years ago) | 7 January 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $394 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 20 (Icosa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 5.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | no data | 243 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4500 Million | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | 1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| SIPP | - | + |
Security technologies
Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) ( - 1200 MHz) | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.64 | 29.11 |
| Recency | 6 January 2019 | 7 January 2025 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 20 |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Ryzen 3 3350U has 333.3% lower power consumption.
Ultra 7 265, on the other hand, has a 699.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The Core Ultra 7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 3 3350U in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 3 3350U is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 3350U and Core Ultra 7 265, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
