Intel Core 7 160UL vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core 9 273PQE across all 17 recorded tests. The Core 7 160UL does not win a single comparison. The largest deltas appear in the PassMark extended instructions test, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 38,743 against the Core 7 160UL's 5,832, a difference of 84.9 percent. Data compression shows an 81.4 percent gap, with the Core 9 273PQE at 585,752 and the Core 7 160UL at 108,953.

Cinebench results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PQE scores 39,190 versus 9,386 for the Core 7 160UL, a 76.1 percent advantage. Single-core R23 shows 5,532 against 1,325, also a 76 percent gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core has the Core 9 273PQE at 16,459 and the Core 7 160UL at 3,942, while R20 single-core is 2,323 versus 556. Cinebench R15 multi-core is 3,950 versus 946, and R15 single-core is 557 versus 133.

The smallest relative gap occurs in PassMark single-threaded tests. The Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 while the Core 7 160UL scores 3,391, a 25.8 percent difference. This indicates that while the Core 9 273PQE dominates every workload, its single-thread advantage is less pronounced than its multi-thread lead.

PassMark integer math shows 164,629 for the Core 9 273PQE and 47,515 for the Core 7 160UL, a 71.1 percent gap. Floating point math is 125,546 versus 25,670, a 79.6 percent difference. Physics tests show 2,754 versus 819, a 70.3 percent gap. Random string sorting has the Core 9 273PQE at 53,167 and the Core 7 160UL at 11,843, a 77.7 percent difference. Data encryption is 29,636 versus 7,146, a 75.9 percent gap, and prime number finding is 198 versus 50, a 74.7 percent difference.

The average benchmark score reinforces the split. The Core 9 273PQE averages 66,099 across all tests, while the Core 7 160UL averages 14,232. The Core 9 273PQE sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 7 160UL sits in the 69th percentile. The Core 9 273PQE's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, which scores 65,914 (0.3 percent behind), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66,855 (1.1 percent ahead). The Core 7 160UL's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14,277 (0.3 percent behind) and the Intel Core i5-10400F at 14,185 (0.3 percent ahead).

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core 9 273PQE outperforms the Intel Core 7 160UL in every benchmark category, with margins ranging from 25.8 percent in single-thread workloads to 84.9 percent in extended instructions. The Core 9 273PQE's 12 cores and 24 threads provide a structural advantage over the Core 7 160UL's 10 cores and 12 threads, and the higher boost clock of 5.90 GHz versus 5.20 GHz further supports its lead.

For users prioritizing raw performance, the Core 9 273PQE is the obvious selection based on the data. Its multi-core scores are roughly four times those of the Core 7 160UL in Cinebench R23, and its PassMark multithread score of 46,107 dwarfs the 11,043 of the Core 7 160UL. The Core 9 273PQE also carries a higher TDP of 125 watts versus 15 watts, which aligns with its higher clock speeds and larger cache.

The Core 7 160UL, despite its lower scores, occupies a distinct position. Its 15-watt TDP and dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 make it a low-power option, though the database does not record any power efficiency metrics. Its socket is the same Intel Socket 1700 as the Core 9 273PQE, but its Raptor Lake architecture and smaller L3 cache (12 MB shared versus 36 MB shared) place it in a different performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins every workload category in the database. For multi-threaded applications such as video rendering, scientific simulation, or data compression, the scores show a 76 to 81 percent advantage over the Core 7 160UL. PassMark data compression favors the Core 9 273PQE by 81.4 percent, and integer math by 71.1 percent, indicating strong performance in general-purpose computing tasks.

The Core 7 160UL has no benchmark wins, but its profile suggests a different use case. Its lower TDP of 15 watts and integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units could serve in low-power desktop systems, though the database does not provide power consumption measurements. The Core 7 160UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, but lacks ECC support, while the Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Core 7 160UL's PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 8 lanes, while the Core 9 273PQE uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which affects expansion bandwidth.

In single-threaded tasks, the Core 9 273PQE leads by 25.8 percent, a smaller margin than in multi-core tests. This suggests that the Core 7 160UL's single-core performance is relatively closer to the Core 9 273PQE, but still clearly behind. The Core 7 160UL's boost clock of 5.20 GHz is not far off the Core 9 273PQE's 5.90 GHz, but the Core 9 273PQE's higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 1.80 GHz likely contributes to its consistent lead.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE scores 39,190, while the Intel Core 7 160UL scores 9,386, a 76.1 percent difference.

Q: What is the single-thread performance gap between the two?

A: In PassMark single-thread tests, the Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 and the Core 7 160UL scores 3,391, a 25.8 percent lead for the Core 9 273PQE.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and both use a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 9 273PQE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 7 160UL has none listed.

Q: Is ECC memory supported on either CPU?

A: The Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 160UL does not.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core 9 273PQE averages 66,099, placing it in the 93rd percentile. The Core 7 160UL averages 14,232, placing it in the 69th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs share the same Intel Socket 1700 and are built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. However, their architectures differ. The Core 7 160UL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, while the Core 9 273PQE uses Bartlett Lake architecture. The Core 7 160UL belongs to the Core 7 generation (Raptor Lake-PS), and the Core 9 273PQE belongs to the Core 9 generation (Bartlett Lake).

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both have an L1 cache of 80 KB per core. The L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core on the Core 7 160UL and 2 MB per core on the Core 9 273PQE. The L3 cache is 12 MB shared on the Core 7 160UL and 36 MB shared on the Core 9 273PQE. Neither CPU has a 3D V-Cache option recorded.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 7 160UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Core 9 273PQE uses UHD Graphics 770. The database does not record graphics benchmark scores for either.

The Core 7 160UL has a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Core 7 160UL has a TDP of 15 watts, and the Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two CPUs differ, based on the recorded data.

| Field | Intel Core 7 160UL | Intel Core 9 273PQE |

|-------|-------------------|---------------------|

| Cores | 10 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base clock | 1.80 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.90 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 125 W |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Not recorded |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS) | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) |

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | false | true |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2026-03-08 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $589 |

| Part number | unknown | SA4Q9 |

Both CPUs are active in production, use dual-channel memory, support DDR4 and DDR5, are not multiplier unlocked, and target the desktop market segment. The Core 9 273PQE has a higher release date and a recorded launch MSRP of $589, while the Core 7 160UL has no MSRP recorded.