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

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts of the Intel Core 7 150UL and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus?

A: The Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare between the two processors?

A: The Core 7 150UL boosts up to 5.00 GHz, whereas the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus reaches a higher 5.50 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 150UL does not.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The Core 7 150UL is built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses TSMC's 3 nm process.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Core 7 150UL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

Q: What are the memory support options?

A: The Core 7 150UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 only.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data places the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus in a dominant position across nearly every measured workload, with the Core 7 150UL left without a single recorded benchmark win in the database. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus posts a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Core 7 150UL sits at the 50th percentile. The average benchmark score of the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is 93,785, a figure that places it in direct competition with server-class processors such as the Intel Xeon 6520P (93,786, 0% delta), AMD EPYC 4564P (95,183, -1.5% delta), and AMD EPYC 9175F (95,615, -1.9% delta).

For heavily threaded workloads, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the clear choice. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 44,253 demonstrates exceptional scaling across its 24 physical cores. Data compression and encryption tasks also favor the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus heavily, with PassMark scores of 804,322 for compression and 59,097 for encryption. The Core 7 150UL, with its 10 cores and modest 15 W TDP, targets efficiency rather than raw throughput, and the recorded data confirms that it cannot match the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus in any tested scenario.

Single-threaded performance also belongs to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, which scores 5,068 in PassMark single-thread tests and 2,439 in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Core 7 150UL's single-core capabilities are not recorded in the database, but its lower boost clock and older architecture suggest a significant gap. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus also delivers in physics simulations with a PassMark physics score of 4,064, while the Core 7 150UL has no comparable entry.

The Core 7 150UL does retain relevance in specific contexts. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained systems, and its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory allows flexibility in platform choice. Its Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units provides a higher EU count than the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's 64 EU Arc graphics, which could matter in integrated-graphics scenarios. However, in terms of raw CPU benchmark results, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins every recorded contest.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct design philosophies from Intel. The Core 7 150UL is based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, and is built on Intel's 10 nm process. It uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. This node advantage gives the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus a substantial transistor density benefit, though the recorded data shows 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, while the Core 7 150UL's transistor count and die size are not listed.

Cache hierarchies differ considerably. The Core 7 150UL offers 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 7 270K Plus more than doubles each level: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This additional cache capacity directly supports the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's higher performance in data-intensive workloads.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses a 24-core design with 24 threads, meaning no hyper-threading, while the Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid configuration with some hyper-threaded cores. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus also features a higher base clock of 3.70 GHz versus 1.70 GHz for the Core 7 150UL, and a higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus includes an unlocked multiplier, a feature absent from the Core 7 150UL. The socket platforms are not interchangeable: the Core 7 150UL uses Socket 1700 while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Socket 1851. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Core 7 150UL is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes.

Specification Differences

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus leads in core count with 24 cores versus 10, and in thread count with 24 threads versus 12. Base clocks differ by 2.00 GHz (3.70 GHz versus 1.70 GHz), and boost clocks differ by 0.50 GHz (5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz). Thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 7 150UL is rated at 15 W, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is rated at 125 W.

Process technology separates the two by node and foundry. The Core 7 150UL uses Intel's 10 nm process; the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses TSMC's 3 nm process. Memory support also differs: the Core 7 150UL supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 only. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s; no such figure exists for the Core 7 150UL. ECC memory is supported on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus but not on the Core 7 150UL.

Cache capacities scale with the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus: L1 cache is 192 KB per core versus 80 KB, L2 cache is 3 MB per core versus 1.25 MB, and L3 cache is 36 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. PCIe support favors the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with Gen 5 and 20 lanes, compared to Gen 4 and 8 lanes for the Core 7 150UL. Integrated graphics differ in execution unit count: 96 EU Iris Xe on the Core 7 150UL versus 64 EU Arc Xe-LPG on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 7 150UL does not. Production status for both is listed as Active. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a launch MSRP of $299. The Core 7 150UL has no recorded launch MSRP. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus carries the part number SA4V6, while the Core 7 150UL's part number is listed as unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records 17 benchmark results for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and none for the Core 7 150UL. In every recorded test, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus delivers a measurable performance figure, while the Core 7 150UL has no corresponding score. The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus at 6,656 points, and the single-core variant at 354 points. Cinebench R20 results are 24,461 multicore and 3,453 single-core. Cinebench R23 results are 44,253 multicore and 2,439 single-core.

PassMark workloads further illustrate the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's capabilities. Data compression scores 804,322, data encryption scores 59,097, and extended instructions score 63,506. Prime number finding scores 615, floating point math scores 229,491, and integer math scores 175,986. The multithread score is 68,574, physics is 4,064, and random string sorting is 96,945. Single-thread performance is recorded at 5,068 in both the PassMark single-thread and single-threaded variants.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's average benchmark score of 93,785 places it within 0% of the Intel Xeon 6520P (93,786), 1.5% behind the AMD EPYC 4564P (95,183), 1.9% behind the AMD EPYC 9175F (95,615), and 2.1% behind the AMD EPYC 4565P (95,764). These deltas indicate that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus performs on par with established server processors, despite being a desktop part with a 125 W TDP.

The absence of benchmark data for the Core 7 150UL means the database shows no direct comparison points. The Core 7 150UL's 50th percentile ranking and zero average benchmark score contrast sharply with the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's 96th percentile and 93,785 average score. The Core 7 150UL's lower core count, lower clocks, and smaller cache hierarchy point to a processor designed for efficiency-first systems, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is engineered for maximum throughput. The recorded data leaves no ambiguity: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus outperforms the Core 7 150UL in every measurable category, and the Core 7 150UL has no recorded benchmark wins to counter that conclusion.