Intel Core 7 150HL vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

Intel Core 7 150HL and Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus occupy different tiers of Intel’s desktop lineup, and the recorded data shows a clear separation in capability. The Core 7 150HL is a 14-core, 20-thread Raptor Lake-PS part built on Intel’s 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread Arrow Lake Refresh processor fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node. The benchmark database contains a full suite of results for the 270K Plus, but no recorded scores for the 150HL, which shapes how the comparison must be read. The 270K Plus holds an average benchmark score of 93785 and sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, whereas the 150HL has no average score and rests at the 50th percentile. This difference in available data is itself informative: the 150HL’s profile is incomplete, while the 270K Plus has been tested across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and multiple Passmark workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus claims every benchmark category where scores exist, and those wins are substantial across both synthetic and application-style workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 270K Plus records a score of 44253, and in R20 multi-core it reaches 24461, with R15 multi-core at 6656. Single-core results are equally strong: R23 single-core at 2439, R20 single-core at 3453, and R15 single-core at 354. Passmark results reinforce the pattern, with multi-thread at 68574, single-thread at 5068, integer math at 175986, floating-point math at 229491, and extended instructions at 63506. The data shows no workload where the 150HL would outperform the 270K Plus, given that no benchmark scores exist for the 150HL at all.

The 150HL’s potential strengths must be inferred from its specifications rather than measured results. It uses a 45 W TDP compared to the 270K Plus’s 125 W TDP, which indicates a much lower power envelope. The 150HL also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the 270K Plus supports only DDR5, giving the older part flexibility in memory platform choice. The 150HL integrates Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, whereas the 270K Plus integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, suggesting the 150HL may deliver stronger integrated graphics performance based on EU count alone. The 150HL uses Intel Socket 1700 and PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851 and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, so the newer part wins on expansion capabilities.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the superior processor in every measured benchmark, and the 150HL lacks any recorded performance data to challenge that. The 270K Plus achieves a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 93785, placing it in the company of server-class parts. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon 6520P with an average score of 93786 and a 0% delta, the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95183 with a -1.5% delta, the AMD EPYC 9175F at 95615 with a -1.9% delta, and the AMD EPYC 4565P at 95764 with a -2.1% delta. This clustering shows the 270K Plus performs at the level of enterprise EPYC and Xeon processors, which is a notable result for a desktop part with a $299 launch MSRP.

The 150HL’s 50th percentile ranking and absence of benchmark scores mean it cannot be positioned as competitive with the 270K Plus in raw performance. Users who need the highest multi-threaded throughput, as demonstrated by the 270K Plus’s Cinebench and Passmark results, should select the newer processor. Users constrained by power consumption might prefer the 150HL’s 45 W TDP, but the database provides no performance numbers to justify that trade-off. The 270K Plus also offers ECC memory support, which the 150HL lacks, and a larger shared L3 cache at 36 MB versus 24 MB. The verdict from the data is clear: the 270K Plus wins on every measurable axis, while the 150HL remains an untested, lower-power alternative.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families and manufacturing partnerships. The 150HL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel’s 10 nm process at Intel foundries. The 270K Plus uses Arrow Lake Refresh architecture with the Arrow Lake codename, built on TSMC’s 3 nm process, and Intel lists 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The process node difference of 10 nm versus 3 nm explains much of the performance gap, as the smaller node allows for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The 270K Plus’s thread count equals its core count, indicating no hyperthreading, while the 150HL provides 20 threads from 14 cores, implying hyperthreading on some cores. Cache hierarchies also differ: the 150HL has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3, while the 270K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The 270K Plus’s larger per-core caches and 50% larger L3 pool support its higher benchmark scores.

Memory and I/O features diverge as well. The 150HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, while the 270K Plus supports only DDR5 but with a rated memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The 270K Plus supports ECC memory; the 150HL does not. PCIe capability favors the 270K Plus with Gen 5 and 20 CPU lanes, versus Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes on the 150HL. The 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the 150HL does not, and the 270K Plus carries the part number SA4V6. Integrated graphics differ in architecture and execution unit count, with the 150HL using Iris Xe Graphics 96EU and the 270K Plus using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Because the database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries and no scores for the 150HL, the comparison must rely entirely on the 270K Plus’s recorded results. The 270K Plus delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44253, which is the strongest multi-threaded result in its recorded suite. Single-core performance peaks at 2439 in R23, 3453 in R20, and 354 in R15. Passmark results show a multi-thread score of 68574 and a single-thread score of 5068, with integer math at 175986 and floating-point math at 229491. Data compression reaches 804322, data encryption hits 59097, and extended instructions score 63506. Random string sorting records 96945, find prime numbers scores 615, and physics reaches 4064.

These numbers place the 270K Plus in a specific performance tier. Its average benchmark score of 93785 sits within 0.0% of the Intel Xeon 6520P, which scores 93786. The AMD EPYC 4564P leads by 1.5% at 95183, the AMD EPYC 9175F leads by 1.9% at 95615, and the AMD EPYC 4565P leads by 2.1% at 95764. The 270K Plus therefore trails its nearest EPYC rivals by small margins but matches the Xeon 6520P almost exactly. For a desktop processor, this level of parity with server parts indicates exceptional throughput, particularly in multi-threaded workloads like Cinebench R23 where the 44253 score reflects the 24-core design’s capability.

The 150HL has no scores to compare, so no direct wins can be attributed to it. Its specifications suggest it would perform at a lower level, given 14 cores versus 24, a 10 nm node versus 3 nm, and a 24 MB L3 cache versus 36 MB. Without measured results, the database cannot quantify the gap, but the architectural differences strongly favor the 270K Plus. The 270K Plus’s 5.50 GHz boost clock also exceeds the 150HL’s 5.00 GHz boost clock, and its 3.70 GHz base clock beats the 150HL’s 2.40 GHz base clock. Every recorded metric and every specification point to the 270K Plus as the dominant part.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus?

A: The 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785 and ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Xeon 6520P scores 93786 with a 0% delta, the AMD EPYC 4564P scores 95183 with a -1.5% delta, the AMD EPYC 9175F scores 95615 with a -1.9% delta, and the AMD EPYC 4565P scores 95764 with a -2.1% delta.

Q: Does the Core 7 150HL have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the database lists no benchmark results for the 150HL, and its average benchmark score is 0 with a 50th percentile ranking.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The 150HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while the 270K Plus supports only DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and ECC support.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: What is the process node and foundry for each chip?

A: The 150HL uses Intel’s 10 nm process, while the 270K Plus uses TSMC’s 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clock speeds are 2.40 GHz for the 150HL and 3.70 GHz for the 270K Plus, with boost clocks of 5.00 GHz and 5.50 GHz respectively. TDP values are 45 W for the 150HL and 125 W for the 270K Plus. The 150HL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. Architecture differs as Raptor Lake versus Arrow Lake Refresh, with codenames Raptor Lake-PS and Arrow Lake respectively. Process nodes are 10 nm for the 150HL and 3 nm for the 270K Plus, with the 270K Plus specifying 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die.

Cache configurations differ at every level: L1 is 80 KB per core on the 150HL versus 192 KB per core on the 270K Plus, L2 is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core, and L3 is 24 MB shared versus 36 MB shared. Memory support covers DDR4 and DDR5 for the 150HL, while the 270K Plus supports only DDR5 and lists a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory is unavailable on the 150HL but supported on the 270K Plus. PCIe capability shows Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes on the 150HL, versus Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes on the 270K Plus. Integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics 96EU on the 150HL and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU on the 270K Plus. The 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the 150HL does not, and the 270K Plus carries the part number SA4V6. Release dates are 2024-04-07 for the 150HL and 2026-03-10 for the 270K Plus, with a launch MSRP of $299 for the 270K Plus.