Intel Core 7 150U vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison
Intel Core 7 150U
Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 7 150U vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus
The Verdict
The benchmark data presents a decisive hierarchy between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins every single recorded head-to-head comparison, taking all 17 benchmark matchups. The Intel Core 7 150U does not record a single victory in any tested workload. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 7 150U ranks in the 71st percentile.
The Core 7 150U is positioned for thin-and-light mobile systems where efficiency matters more than peak throughput. Its 15 W TDP classifies it as a low-power part. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, with a 55 W TDP, targets high-performance mobile workstations and enthusiast laptops. The average benchmark score of the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is 79574, compared to 17395 for the Core 7 150U. That difference, roughly 4.6 times higher, reflects two entirely different performance classes.
The data shows the Core 7 150U belongs in systems prioritizing portability and battery life over compute intensity. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus belongs in machines where rendering, compilation, encryption, and scientific workloads are the primary use cases. Users running heavily threaded applications should pick the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus without qualification. Users whose workloads are light and intermittent will find the Core 7 150U sufficient, but the benchmark record offers no scenario where the smaller chip outperforms the larger one.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural lineages and different manufacturing sources. The Intel Core 7 150U uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-U codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename from the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process. The Ultra 9 integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the Core 7 150U has no transistor or die size figures recorded.
Core counts differ substantially. The Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with efficiency cores that do not add hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, a configuration where all cores appear to operate without hyper-threading. The Ultra 9 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 150U has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 advantage for the Ultra 9 is 3 times.
Clock speeds also favor the larger chip. The Core 7 150U has a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Both parts boost aggressively, but the Ultra 9 starts from a significantly higher base.
Memory support differs. The Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports DDR5 only, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Ultra 9 supports ECC memory; the Core 7 150U does not. PCIe connectivity favors the Ultra 9 with Gen 5 and 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Core 7 150U offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes.
Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 7 150U uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core 7 150U has more execution units in its iGPU, though the database records no graphics benchmarks for either part. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 7 150U does not. Sockets are incompatible: the Core 7 150U uses Intel BGA 1744, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114. Release dates differ, with the Core 7 150U launching earlier and the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus launching later.
Where Each One Wins
The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins in every category that the benchmark suite measures. The single-core results show a meaningful but modest advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 9 scores 2356 against 1875.5, a 20.4 percent lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4951 against 3508, a 29.1 percent lead. These are the smallest deltas in the entire comparison, indicating that per-core performance is closer than multi-core performance.
The multi-core results are where the Ultra 9 separates itself completely. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 39684 for the Ultra 9 against 8883 for the Core 7 150U, a 77.6 percent lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 21198 against 5248, a 75.2 percent lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5981 against 1505.5, a 74.8 percent lead. The 24-core configuration simply overwhelms the 10-core part in any workload that scales with core count.
Specialized workloads amplify the gap further. PassMark find prime numbers shows 519 for the Ultra 9 against 58 for the Core 7 150U, an 88.8 percent lead, the largest delta in the dataset. PassMark extended instructions shows 51290 against 8748, an 82.9 percent lead. PassMark floating point math shows 201773 against 34405, also 82.9 percent. PassMark data encryption shows 50008 against 10025, an 80 percent lead. PassMark data compression shows 658724 against 158622, a 75.9 percent lead. PassMark random string sorting shows 80327 against 18269, a 77.3 percent lead. PassMark integer math shows 164839 against 51057, a 69 percent lead. PassMark physics shows 3387 against 1012, a 70.1 percent lead. PassMark multithread shows 59439 against 14700, a 75.3 percent lead.
The Core 7 150U has no benchmark category in which it records a win. Its advantages are structural rather than measured: a much lower 15 W TDP, support for older DDR4 memory, and more iGPU execution units at 96 versus 64. The data shows that for any performance metric in the database, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the correct choice.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads.
Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?
A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 39684 against 8883 for the Core 7 150U, a 77.6 percent lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 75.2 percent lead, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 74.8 percent lead.
Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?
A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus. It scores 2356 in Cinebench R23 single-core against 1875.5 for the Core 7 150U, a 20.4 percent lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4951 against 3508, a 29.1 percent lead.
Q: Do the two processors use the same manufacturing process?
A: No. The Core 7 150U uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses TSMC's 3 nm process and is built on the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename.
Q: What memory types does each processor support?
A: The Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports DDR5 only, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and supports ECC memory.
Q: Which processor sits higher in the overall performance distribution?
A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 79574. The Core 7 150U is in the 71st percentile, with an average benchmark score of 17395.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The largest single victory for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus comes in PassMark find prime numbers. The Ultra 9 scores 519 against 58 for the Core 7 150U, an 88.8 percent lead. This workload is heavily dependent on integer throughput and cache behavior, both areas where the 24-core Arrow Lake part holds overwhelming advantages.
PassMark extended instructions and floating point math both show an 82.9 percent lead for the Ultra 9. The extended instructions result is 51290 against 8748. The floating point result is 201773 against 34405. These results indicate the Ultra 9 handles SIMD-heavy and vectorized code much more effectively, consistent with its larger cache hierarchy and newer process node.
PassMark data encryption shows 50008 against 10025, an 80 percent lead. This workload benefits from the Ultra 9's higher core count and newer architecture. PassMark data compression shows 658724 against 158622, a 75.9 percent lead. Random string sorting shows 80327 against 18269, a 77.3 percent lead. These memory-intensive tasks favor the Ultra 9's 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth.
Cinebench multi-core results are uniformly lopsided. R15 multi-core shows 5981 against 1505.5, a 74.8 percent lead. R20 multi-core shows 21198 against 5248, a 75.2 percent lead. R23 multi-core shows 39684 against 8883, a 77.6 percent lead. The progression shows that as the workload becomes more sustained and demanding, the Ultra 9's advantage grows slightly.
PassMark integer math shows 164839 against 51057, a 69 percent lead, the smallest multi-core delta. PassMark physics shows 3387 against 1012, a 70.1 percent lead. PassMark multithread shows 59439 against 14700, a 75.3 percent lead.
Single-core results are closer but still favor the Ultra 9 decisively. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 340 against 254, a 25.3 percent lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2992 against 740, a 75.3 percent lead, an outlier compared to other single-core tests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2356 against 1875.5, a 20.4 percent lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4951 against 3508, a 29.1 percent lead.
The Core 7 150U's best relative showing comes in the two Cinebench single-core tests where the lead is 20.4 and 25.3 percent. These are the only tests where the Ultra 9's margin falls below 29 percent. The data suggests that for lightly threaded workloads, the Core 7 150U is closer in performance, but still behind. There is no benchmark in the database where the Core 7 150U records a higher score than the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus.