Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX Comparison

The Intel Core 3 201E and the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX represent two distinct extremes in Intel's desktop and mobile lineups. The data shows a decisive performance gap, with the Core Ultra 9 275HX winning all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. However, the comparison is not merely about raw speed; it highlights fundamental differences in core count, power envelope, platform, and target use case. The Core 3 201E is a modest desktop processor, while the Core Ultra 9 275HX is a high-end mobile part designed for maximum compute throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX wins every single recorded test. It does not just edge out the Core 3 201E; it dominates. The largest margin of victory comes in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 448, a 87.3% advantage over the Core 3 201E's 57. This indicates that the Ultra 9's higher core count and architecture deliver massive gains in integer-heavy, parallel workloads.

The Intel Core 3 201E has no wins in this head-to-head dataset. Its role is not to compete with the Ultra 9 but to serve as a low-power desktop option. With a 60W TDP, 4 cores, and 8 threads, it is geared towards basic desktop tasks. Its single-core performance is respectable for its class, as shown by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1780, but it is still 19.2% behind the Ultra 9's 2204 in that same test. The Core 3 201E's strengths are not measurable in this comparison; it is simply outclassed in every metric recorded.

The Core Ultra 9 275HX is built for heavy multi-threaded workloads. Its 24 cores and 24 threads, combined with a 5.40 GHz boost clock, allow it to excel in rendering, scientific computing, and content creation. The data confirms this, as its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35589 is 64.6% higher than the Core 3 201E's 12613. The Ultra 9 also shows significant advantages in memory bandwidth, with 102.4 GB/s compared to 76.8 GB/s, and in PCIe lanes, offering Gen 5 support with 20 lanes versus 16 lanes. This makes the Ultra 9 the clear choice for users who need maximum parallel processing power.

Given the data, the Core Ultra 9 275HX is the winner in every scenario where performance is the primary criterion. The Core 3 201E, however, is the only one of the two that fits a standard desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700), making it a candidate for budget desktop builds where the Ultra 9's mobile BGA 2114 package would not be applicable.

FAQ

Q: What is the most significant performance difference between the two processors?

A: The most significant difference is in multi-core performance. The Core Ultra 9 275HX achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35589, which is 64.6% higher than the Core 3 201E's 12613. This gap is consistent across other multi-threaded tests, such as PassMark multithread, where the Ultra 9 scores 55759 versus 14839.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX has a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz, compared to the Intel Core 3 201E's 4.80 GHz. This contributes to its superior single-thread performance, which is 26.1% higher in PassMark single-thread tests (4713 vs 3482).

Q: Are both processors based on the same manufacturing process?

A: No, they are not. The Intel Core 3 201E is manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Ultra 9 also has a much larger die size at 243 mm², compared to 163 mm² for the Core 3.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX does not. This makes the Core 3 201E a potential option for entry-level workstation or server applications where data integrity is critical.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX has significantly more, with 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 3 201E has only 4 cores and 8 threads. This difference explains the Ultra 9's overwhelming advantage in multi-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the difference in their memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX offers higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s, while the Intel Core 3 201E provides 76.8 GB/s. Both support dual-channel memory, but the Ultra 9 supports DDR5 only, whereas the Core 3 supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear and consistent pattern of victory for the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 9 scores 5619.5, a 77.4% lead over the Core 3 201E's 1271. The gap narrows slightly in single-core tests but remains substantial. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ultra 9 scores 334, which is 46.4% higher than the Core 3 201E's 179.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the results are similar. The multi-core score for the Ultra 9 is 19899, a 73.4% advantage over the Core 3 201E's 5297. The single-core score is 2809, also a 73.4% advantage over 747. This pattern indicates that the Ultra 9's per-core performance is significantly better, not just its core count.

In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score for the Ultra 9 is 35589, which is 64.6% ahead of the Core 3 201E's 12613. The single-core score is 2204, a 19.2% advantage over 1780. This is the smallest margin of victory in the entire dataset, but it still shows the Ultra 9's superior single-thread execution.

The PassMark suite reveals the most extreme differences. In data compression, the Ultra 9 scores 608381, a 73% lead over the Core 3 201E's 164160. In data encryption, the Ultra 9 scores 47112, an 81% lead over 8931. The largest gap is in find prime numbers, where the Ultra 9's score of 448 is 87.3% higher than the Core 3 201E's 57. Floating point math shows an 82.6% lead (191186 vs 33260), and extended instructions show a 76.5% lead (47016 vs 11035). Even random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive test, shows a 76.1% lead for the Ultra 9 (74320 vs 17783).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every fundamental specification. The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX has 24 cores and 24 threads. The base clock of the Core 3 is 3.60 GHz, which is higher than the Ultra 9's 2.70 GHz, but the Ultra 9 has a higher boost clock at 5.40 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. The TDP is close, with the Core 3 at 60W and the Ultra 9 at 55W, but this is notable because the Ultra 9 delivers far more performance within a similar power envelope.

The sockets are completely different: the Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop platform, while the Core Ultra 9 275HX uses Intel BGA 2114, a mobile platform. The Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 9 supports only DDR5. The Core 3 has ECC memory support, but the Ultra 9 does not. The PCIe configuration also differs: the Core 3 has Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Ultra 9 has Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The integrated graphics are different as well. The Core 3 201E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 9 275HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core 3 201E has a locked multiplier, while the Ultra 9 is multiplier unlocked, allowing for overclocking. The launch MSRP for the Core 3 201E is $134; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 9.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is stark. The Intel Core 3 201E is based on the Bartlett Lake codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a die size of 163 mm². The Core Ultra 9 275HX uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Arrow Lake-HX codename, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. Its die size is 243 mm², and it contains 17,800 million transistors.

The cache hierarchies are very different. The Core 3 201E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 275HX has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This larger cache pool is a major factor in the Ultra 9's performance advantage, especially in data-intensive workloads.

The Core Ultra 9 275HX also comes from the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, whereas the Core 3 201E is from the Core 3 generation based on Bartlett Lake. The Ultra 9's architecture is designed for high-end mobile computing, with its 24 cores (likely a mix of performance and efficiency cores) and a 5.40 GHz boost clock. The Core 3 201E is a simpler, more conventional desktop design with 4 cores and 8 threads. These architectural differences, including the process node and foundry, explain the vast performance gap and make the Core Ultra 9 275HX a far more capable processor for demanding applications.