Intel Core 7 150HL vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Intel Core 7 150HL and Intel Core 9 273PQE are both desktop processors from Intel, built for the same socket but designed for different workloads. The data in the database shows two distinct performance profiles, one with a higher core count and the other with significantly higher clock speeds and a larger cache. The Core 7 150HL uses 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 9 part reaches boost clocks of 5.90 GHz, whereas the Core 7 tops out at 5.00 GHz. These differences in configuration point to different strengths in single-threaded versus multi-threaded applications, though the benchmark results present a more complex picture.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE holds a clear advantage in nearly every measured benchmark category. The Core 7 150HL, on the other hand, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, meaning all comparisons come from the Core 9's results and its position relative to other processors. The Core 9 273PQE sits in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 7 150HL sits in the 50th percentile. That gap alone indicates a substantial performance difference, but the specific test results show where the Core 9 excels.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Core 9 273PQE delivers strong results. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39190, and in Cinebench R20 multi-core it reaches 16459. The PassMark multi-thread test shows a score of 46107, and the integer math test produces 164629. The floating point math test scores 125546, and the data compression test reaches 585752. These numbers suggest the Core 9 is well-suited for rendering, scientific computing, and other parallel tasks.

Single-threaded performance is also a strength for the Core 9. The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 5532, while the Cinebench R20 single-core score is 2323. PassMark single-thread results show 4573. The find prime numbers test, which is highly sensitive to single-core speed, scores 198, a relatively modest figure but consistent with the processor's boost clock behavior. The Core 9's 5.90 GHz boost clock likely drives these single-threaded results.

Given that the Core 7 150HL has no benchmark entries, the database records zero wins for it. The Core 9 273PQE records all the wins in the head-to-head comparison, though that is a function of missing data rather than a direct measurement. For users prioritizing raw performance, the Core 9 is the only option with verified results.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: The Core 9 273PQE. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 5532, and its PassMark single-thread score is 4573, while the Core 7 150HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each processor?

A: The Core 7 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Core 7 150HL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The Core 7 150HL boosts to 5.00 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE boosts to 5.90 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Core 7 150HL has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Core 7 150HL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Core 7 150HL and the Core 9 273PQE. All performance data comes from the Core 9's individual benchmark scores. The Core 7 150HL has an average benchmark score of zero and no listed tests, which limits any direct comparison to specification-based analysis.

The Core 9 273PQE's benchmark results place it near several high-end rivals. Its average benchmark score is 66099. The nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66159, a difference of -0.1 percent. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65914, putting the Core 9 0.3 percent ahead. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 66855, which is 1.1 percent higher than the Core 9. The AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66925, 1.2 percent higher. These narrow margins indicate the Core 9 273PQE performs within a few percent of these established processors in aggregate benchmarks.

Looking at specific workloads, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39190 shows strong parallel scaling from its 12 cores and 24 threads. The single-core score of 5532 in the same test reflects the high boost clock. The PassMark data compression score of 585752 is particularly high, suggesting efficient handling of memory-intensive tasks. The extended instructions score of 38743 and the random string sorting score of 53167 further indicate solid performance in specialized operations.

The Core 7 150HL, with its 14 cores and 20 threads, could theoretically compete in multi-threaded tasks due to its higher core count. However, without benchmark data, the database cannot confirm this. The Core 9's higher thread count of 24 versus 20, combined with its larger 36 MB L3 cache and faster boost clock, likely provides an advantage in most measured scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Core 7 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 2.40 GHz for the Core 7 and 3.40 GHz for the Core 9. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz and 5.90 GHz respectively. The thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 7 is rated at 45 watts, while the Core 9 is rated at 125 watts.

Both processors use the Intel Socket 1700. Memory support is identical, with both supporting DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The Core 9 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 7 has no such figure. ECC memory support differs, with only the Core 9 offering it. PCIe lanes also differ: the Core 7 provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Core 9 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 7 uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Core 9 uses UHD Graphics 770.

The release dates are far apart. The Core 7 150HL was released in 2024-04-07, while the Core 9 273PQE was released in 2026-03-08. The Core 9 has a launch MSRP of $589, while the Core 7 has no recorded launch price. The Core 9's part number is SA4Q9, while the Core 7's part number is unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 150HL is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture with the same codename. Both are manufactured on a 10 nm process node by Intel. The generation labels reflect their architectures: the Core 7 is listed as Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS), while the Core 9 is listed as Core 9 (Bartlett Lake).

Cache configurations are identical at the lower levels. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache differs: the Core 7 has 24 MB shared, while the Core 9 has 36 MB shared. This 12 MB difference in L3 cache could impact workloads that rely on frequent data reuse.

The Core 9's architecture supports ECC memory, which the Core 7 does not. The PCIe implementation also differs. The Core 9 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core 7 offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes. This makes the Core 9 more suitable for high-bandwidth peripherals like modern GPUs and NVMe storage. The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 7 featuring Iris Xe Graphics 96EU and the Core 9 featuring UHD Graphics 770.

The process node is the same for both, at 10 nm. Neither processor lists transistor counts or die sizes in the database. The foundry is Intel for both. The market segment for both is Desktop, and both are marked as Active production status.

The Verdict

The data in the database points decisively toward the Core 9 273PQE for users who need verified performance. Its benchmark scores place it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 66099. The Core 7 150HL sits in the 50th percentile with an average score of zero, meaning no benchmark data exists to support its performance claims. For any workload where measured results matter, the Core 9 is the only choice with recorded evidence.

The Core 9's specifications reinforce its position. It has a higher boost clock of 5.90 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, more threads at 24 versus 20, a larger 36 MB L3 cache versus 24 MB, and support for faster PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Its 125-watt TDP reflects a higher power envelope, which allows those clocks to be sustained. The Core 7's 45-watt TDP indicates a more power-efficient design, but at the cost of raw performance.

The Core 7 150HL is not without merit. Its 14 cores provide a higher physical core count than the Core 9's 12, and its lower TDP of 45 watts makes it suitable for systems with tighter thermal constraints. It also uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, which may offer better integrated graphics performance than the Core 9's UHD Graphics 770, though no benchmark data confirms this. For users who prioritize low power consumption and do not require ECC memory or the highest clocks, the Core 7 could serve adequately, but the database contains no performance figures to validate that choice.

The Core 9 273PQE also compares favorably to its nearest rivals. It trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by only 1.1 percent and the AMD EPYC 4465P by 1.2 percent, while leading the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D by 0.3 percent. These margins are small, but they place the Core 9 in the same performance tier as some of the strongest processors available. Its 2026 release date and $589 launch MSRP position it as a current, high-end option.

In summary, the Core 9 273PQE is the processor to select when performance is the primary criterion. It delivers top-tier benchmark results across single and multi-threaded workloads, supports ECC memory, and offers modern PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. The Core 7 150HL has no benchmark data and lags in clock speed, cache size, and memory bandwidth. The data does not support choosing the Core 7 over the Core 9 for any performance-sensitive task.