CPU Comparison
Core Ultra 7 258V vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is a mobile processor based on the Lunar Lake architecture, tailored for premium thin and light laptops. It features an 8-core design with 4 Lion Cove P-Cores and 4 Skymont E-Cores, delivering 8 threads without Hyper-Threading. Like the 268V, it integrates 32 GB of LPDDR5X memory directly onto the package, running at 8533 MT/s, which provides substantial bandwidth and capacity for demanding applications while conserving power. The 258V differentiates itself with a slightly lower max turbo frequency of 4.8 GHz and an NPU providing 47 TOPS, just slightly under the 48 TOPS found in higher-end variants. It operates at a highly efficient 17W base TDP, ensuring long battery life for on-the-go productivity. The integrated Arc 140V graphics deliver excellent visual performance for a mobile chip. This CPU is positioned as a high-value option for users needing large integrated memory and strong AI capabilities in an ultraportable form factor.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
32GB of RAM ensures excellent multitasking capabilities.
Excellent single-core performance for office tasks and web apps.
Gaming
Good for light gaming, though slightly lower clocks than 268V marginally impact FPS.
Arc 140V is a massive leap, allowing 1080p gaming in thin-and-lights.
Virtualization
Sufficient memory and cores for light VM usage.
Limited by 8 threads and 32GB max memory, but capable of light VMs.
Efficiency
Top-tier power efficiency identical to other Lunar Lake chips.
Industry-leading performance-per-watt for x86 laptops.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- 47 TOPS NPU is more than enough for Copilot+
- Total 115 TOPS platform performance
- 32GB RAM is highly beneficial for local AI models
- 48 TOPS NPU enables Copilot+ PC features like Recall
- Can run small LLMs locally
- NPU offloads CPU/GPU for better battery during AI tasks
Content Creation
Gaming
- Arc 140V handles esports titles well
- Slightly lower dynamic GPU frequency (1950 MHz)
- Not intended for AAA gaming at high settings
- Arc 140V iGPU can play modern titles at 1080p Low/Medium
- Massive improvement over previous Intel iGPUs
- Not a replacement for discrete laptop GPUs
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- 32GB of integrated memory
- Excellent power efficiency
- 47 TOPS NPU for AI
- Great value compared to 268V
- Arc 140V graphics
Cons
- Slightly lower clocks than 268V
- Non-upgradeable memory
- Limited to 8 threads
Pros
- Exceptional power efficiency
- 32GB RAM integrated on package
- 48 TOPS NPU for Copilot+ AI
- Powerful Arc 140V integrated graphics
- Silent operation in slim chassis
Cons
- Memory is non-upgradable (soldered to CPU)
- Only 8 threads limits heavy multi-threading
- Expensive, only found in premium laptops
- Low PCIe lane count for expansion
Competitors & Alternatives
Core Ultra 7 258V
- AMD Ryzen AI 9 365Rival
Mobile
- Qualcomm Snapdragon X PlusRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headApple M3Rival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core Ultra 5 228VRival
Mobile
- AMD Ryzen 7 8840URival
Mobile
- Intel Core Ultra 7 268VAlt
For slightly higher clock speeds and 1 extra NPU TOP.
- Intel Core Ultra 7 266VAlt
If 16GB of RAM is enough for your needs.
- Apple MacBook Air M3Alt
For a different premium OS experience.
For a cheaper Lunar Lake option.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
- AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370Rival
Mobile
- Qualcomm Snapdragon X EliteRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headApple M3Rival
Mobile
- Alt
Best alternative if you are open to macOS for premium ultrabooks.
Compare head-to-head - Intel Core Ultra 7 258VAlt
Slightly lower clocked Lunar Lake chip for a better price.
Meteor Lake alternative if you need more cores and discrete GPU.
Compare head-to-head
Our Verdict on Each
The 258V offers nearly identical performance to the 268V at a potentially lower price, making it a smart choice for 32GB ultrabooks.
Best for: The Core Ultra 7 258V is exclusively found in pre-built laptops and is a fantastic choice for users who need a highly portable machine with plenty of memory. If you want 32 GB of RAM for multitasking, coding, or light creative work, but don't necessarily need the absolute maximum clock speeds of the 268V, the 258V offers excellent value. It is perfect for students, professionals, and writers who want all-day battery life without worrying about running out of RAM. Just remember that neither the CPU nor the memory can be upgraded. If you find a laptop with the 258V at a good price, it is a highly recommended purchase for everyday productivity and AI tasks.
Read the full reviewAn engineering marvel that combines memory, CPU, GPU, and NPU into a highly efficient package, redefining laptop battery life and AI capabilities.
Best for: Buying a premium ultrabook for all-day battery life and AI features.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Core Ultra 7 258V or Intel Core Ultra 9 288V?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V comes out ahead with a score of 9.2/10. That said, the best choice depends on your workload — check the spec and performance breakdown above for gaming, productivity and efficiency differences.
Which is faster for gaming, Core Ultra 7 258V or Intel Core Ultra 9 288V?
For gaming, the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V leads with a gaming performance score of 85/100 among Core Ultra 7 258V and Intel Core Ultra 9 288V.
Which uses less power?
The Core Ultra 7 258V has the lowest rated TDP. Power draw across these chips: Core Ultra 7 258V (17 W), Intel Core Ultra 9 288V (30 W).
Do Core Ultra 7 258V and Intel Core Ultra 9 288V use the same socket?
No. They use different sockets (Core Ultra 7 258V: Intel BGA 2833, Intel Core Ultra 9 288V: BGA 2833), so each needs a compatible motherboard.
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Core Ultra 7 258V (0), Intel Core Ultra 9 288V (15,000). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.