Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins every single one of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 3 201E does not register a single victory in any workload category, whether single-threaded, multi-threaded, or specialized instruction tests. This is a complete sweep, and the margin of victory is consistently massive across all benchmark families.

The Core 3 201E's closest relative performance comes in single-thread tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 2356 against the Core 3's 1780, a 24.4% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test shows a similar gap of 29.7%, with scores of 4951 versus 3482. These are the only two tests where the delta falls below 30%, indicating that the Core 3 201E is comparatively strongest when only one core is active.

Every multi-threaded benchmark tells a different story. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus leads by margins ranging from 66.3% to 89% across the full suite. The largest deficit for the Core 3 201E appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 9 scores 519 against just 57, a gap of 89%. Data encryption shows an 82.1% deficit, floating point math 83.5%, and extended instructions 78.5%. These are not close contests by any measure.

The Core 3 201E does hold a 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, which places it above the average processor. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19047 and a 0% delta, the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19039 with a 0.1% delta, and the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982 with a 0.4% delta. So the Core 3 201E sits in respectable company for an entry-level desktop part. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, by contrast, ranks in the 95th percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core i9-14900KF at 79371 (0.3% delta) and the AMD EPYC 7413 at 80041 (-0.6% delta). That places the Ultra 9 in flagship territory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an average benchmark score of 79574, compared to 19056 for the Intel Core 3 201E.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-thread performance?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with 2356 against 1780, a 24.4% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4951 versus 3482, a 29.7% advantage.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Core 3 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: Are both processors currently in production?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 3 201E and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus have an Active production status.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any single test?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 519 against 57, a deficit of 89% for the Core 3 201E.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the fundamental performance hierarchy. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 5981 against 1271, a 78.7% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows 21198 versus 5297, a 75% lead. In R23 multi-core, the Ultra 9 delivers 39684 against 12613, a 68.2% advantage. The scaling across Cinebench generations is consistent, with the Ultra 9 maintaining roughly three times the multi-threaded output.

Single-core Cinebench results narrow the gap but still favor the Ultra 9 decisively. R15 single-core shows 340 against 179, a 47.4% lead. R20 single-core shows 2992 against 747, a 75% lead. R23 single-core shows 2356 against 1780, a 24.4% lead. The R20 result stands out as particularly lopsided, with the Ultra 9 quadrupling the Core 3's score.

PassMark workloads cover a broader range of computational patterns. In integer math, the Ultra 9 scores 164839 against 43894, a 73.4% lead. Floating point math shows 201773 against 33260, an 83.5% lead. Data compression favors the Ultra 9 at 658724 versus 164160, a 75.1% lead. Data encryption shows 50008 versus 8931, an 82.1% lead. Extended instructions deliver 51290 versus 11035, a 78.5% lead. Random string sorting gives 80327 versus 17783, a 77.9% lead.

The multithread PassMark score of 59439 versus 14839 represents a 75% lead, while the physics test shows 3387 versus 1141, a 66.3% lead. Every single workload in the recorded data confirms the same conclusion: the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus outperforms the Core 3 201E by margins that range from roughly one-quarter to nearly nine-tenths.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Core 3 201E uses 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for the Core 3 and 2.70 GHz for the Ultra 9. Boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 5.50 GHz respectively. The Core 3 has a TDP of 60, while the Ultra 9 has a TDP of 55.

Socket compatibility is entirely separate: the Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114. The Core 3 is a desktop part, while the Ultra 9 is a mobile part. The Core 3 has a locked multiplier, while the Ultra 9 has an unlocked multiplier.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 and 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 9. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe lane counts differ: the Core 3 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 3 and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU on the Ultra 9.

The release dates are distinct. The Core 3 201E released on 2025-01-12T17:00:00.000Z, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus released on 2026-03-16T17:00:00.000Z. The Core 3 has a launch MSRP of $134, while the Ultra 9 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different silicon. The Core 3 201E is built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 163 mm². The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is built on TSMC's 3 nm process, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The Core 3's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Cache hierarchies are substantially 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 290HX Plus has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 triples the L3 cache capacity.

Codename and generation differ as well. The Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) generation. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename and belongs to the Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX) generation. The Core Ultra 9 also belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 product series.

Part numbers differ: the Core 3 is SRVTR, while the Ultra 9 is SADSS. The process node difference is significant: 10 nm versus 3 nm represents a generational leap in manufacturing technology, which helps explain the Ultra 9's superior performance despite its higher core count and larger die.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a single clear conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the superior processor in every measured workload. It wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 95th percentile ranking versus 73rd for the Core 3 201E, and delivers an average benchmark score of 79574 against 19056. The performance gap ranges from 24.4% in Cinebench R23 single-core to 89% in PassMark find prime numbers.

The Core 3 201E serves a different role. It is a desktop processor with 4 cores, 8 threads, a 60 TDP, and a launch MSRP of $134. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, uses Intel Socket 1700, and belongs to the Bartlett Lake generation on Intel's 10 nm process. Its benchmark profile places it alongside the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, Intel Core i5-12400F, and Intel Core i5-1335U, with average scores within 0.4% of each other.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a mobile processor with 24 cores, 24 threads, a 55 TDP, and an unlocked multiplier. It uses Intel BGA 2114, supports DDR5 only, and belongs to the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh generation on TSMC's 3 nm process. Its benchmark profile places it alongside the Intel Core i9-14900KF, AMD EPYC 7413, Intel Core i9-14900K, and Intel Xeon w5-2565X.

For workloads that demand maximum throughput, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the clear choice. Its 36 MB of L3 cache, 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 24 cores deliver results that the Core 3 201E cannot approach. For workloads that prioritize lower power consumption and a desktop form factor, the Core 3 201E offers a functional baseline, but the data shows no scenario where it outperforms the Ultra 9. The performance hierarchy is consistent, decisive, and complete.