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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear picture: the Intel Core 9 273PTE wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core 7 160UL recording zero wins. The most striking pattern is the consistency of the gap across Cinebench tests, where every multi-core and single-core iteration shows a delta of -54.1% for the Core 7 160UL. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PTE scores 20445 against 9386, while in single-core it posts 2886 versus 1325. This consistent delta across all six Cinebench tests indicates a fundamental performance tier difference rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The Passmark suite reveals a wider variance in the margin between the two processors. The smallest gap appears in passmark_single_thread, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 3433 against 3391, a delta of only -1.2%. This near-parity in single-threaded performance suggests that both chips have similar per-core capabilities for lightly threaded tasks, despite the Core 9 273PTE carrying a higher boost clock. The largest margin appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 142 against 50, a delta of -64.8%. Integer-heavy workloads clearly favor the Core 9 273PTE by a substantial margin, as shown by the passmark_integer_math result of 82411 versus 47515, a delta of -42.3%.

Data compression and encryption workloads further emphasize the Core 9 273PTE's advantage. The passmark_data_compression test shows 258704 versus 108953, a delta of -57.9%, while passmark_data_encryption shows 14253 versus 7146, a delta of -49.9%. Extended instruction throughput follows suit, with the Core 9 273PTE scoring 15952 against 5832, a delta of -63.4%. Floating-point math also heavily favors the Core 9 273PTE: 60673 versus 25670, a delta of -57.7%. The multithread score of 24054 against 11043, a delta of -54.1%, aligns closely with the Cinebench multi-core results, reinforcing the overall thread-scaling deficit of the Core 7 160UL.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows that the Intel Core 9 273PTE wins in every measured category, but the magnitude of its advantage varies by workload type. For single-threaded tasks, the Core 9 273PTE holds a slim but real edge, as demonstrated by the 1.2% delta in passmark_single_thread and the 54.1% delta in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Cinebench single-core gap is far wider than the Passmark single-thread gap, which suggests the Core 9 273PTE benefits more from sustained boost behavior under the Cinebench workload specifically.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Core 9 273PTE's advantage expands dramatically. The processor's 24 threads against the Core 7 160UL's 12 threads directly translate into roughly double the throughput in Cinebench multi-core tests and a 54.1% delta in passmark_multithread. Integer math shows the smallest multi-thread margin at -42.3%, while prime number finding shows the largest at -64.8%. This variance indicates that the Core 9 273PTE's additional cores and threads scale particularly well with certain computational patterns, especially those involving division and modular arithmetic.

The Core 7 160UL has no benchmark category where it takes the lead. However, the data does show that its single-threaded Passmark score of 3391 is close enough to the Core 9 273PTE's 3433 that users running mostly single-threaded legacy applications would see only a minor performance difference. In contrast, users running heavily threaded rendering, compression, or physics workloads would see the Core 9 273PTE's roughly 54% to 65% advantage in most tests. The passmark_physics result of 1917 versus 819, a delta of -57.3%, further confirms that the Core 9 273PTE is the stronger choice for simulation and physics-based applications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same Intel Socket 1700 platform and are both built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry. However, their underlying designs diverge significantly. The Intel Core 7 160UL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename with no specific architecture designation recorded. The Core 7 160UL belongs to the Core 7 generation under Raptor Lake-PS, whereas the Core 9 273PTE belongs to the Core 9 generation under Bartlett Lake.

Core and thread counts differ substantially: the Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 9 273PTE effectively doubles the thread count through simultaneous multithreading, which the Core 7 160UL does not apply to the same extent. The L2 cache configuration also differs: the Core 7 160UL has 1.25 MB per core, while the Core 9 273PTE has 2 MB per core. L3 cache shows a major gap, with the Core 7 160UL offering 12 MB shared against the Core 9 273PTE's 36 MB shared. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 cache per core.

Memory and I/O capabilities also set the two apart. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses, but the Core 9 273PTE additionally records a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 160UL has no ECC support and no recorded memory bandwidth figure. PCIe connectivity differs: the Core 7 160UL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU-only lanes, while the Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU-only lanes. Integrated graphics likewise differ, with the Core 7 160UL featuring Iris Xe Graphics 96EU and the Core 9 273PTE featuring UHD Graphics 730.

The base and boost clocks show an interesting trade-off. The Core 7 160UL has a higher base clock at 1.80 GHz versus the Core 9 273PTE's 1.40 GHz, but the Core 9 273PTE has a higher boost clock at 5.50 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. The Core 7 160UL carries a 15 W TDP against the Core 9 273PTE's 45 W TDP, indicating the Core 7 160UL is designed for much lower sustained power draw. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 9 273PTE has a recorded part number of SA4QJ, while the Core 7 160UL's part number is listed as unknown. Release dates differ as well: the Core 7 160UL launched in April 2024, while the Core 9 273PTE launched in March 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE wins all single-threaded tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core it scores 2886 versus 1325, and in Passmark single-thread it scores 3433 versus 3391. The Passmark margin is just 1.2%, but the Cinebench margin is 54.1%.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The Core 9 273PTE leads by 54.1% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (20445 versus 9386) and by the same 54.1% in Passmark multithread (24054 versus 11043). The widest multi-threaded margin is in Passmark find prime numbers at 64.8%.

Q: Do the two processors use the same socket?

A: Yes, both use Intel Socket 1700. They also share the same 10 nm process node and Intel as the foundry.

Q: What are the main architectural differences?

A: The Core 7 160UL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename. The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads versus 10 cores and 12 threads, plus 36 MB of shared L3 cache versus 12 MB.

Q: Does the Core 9 273PTE support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory. The Core 7 160UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has newer PCIe capabilities?

A: The Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU-only lanes. The Core 7 160UL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU-only lanes.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Core 7 160UL has a 15 W TDP, while the Core 9 273PTE has a 45 W TDP. Both are active production parts.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core 9 273PTE is the stronger processor in every recorded measurement. Its 82nd percentile ranking against all CPUs, compared to the Core 7 160UL's 69th percentile, confirms this at a broader level. The Core 9 273PTE's average benchmark score of 31143 against 14232 more than doubles the Core 7 160UL's average. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i7-12700F with an average score of 31081 and a delta of 0.2%, while the Core 7 160UL sits near the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277 with a delta of -0.3%.

For users building a system where multi-threaded performance matters, the Core 9 273PTE delivers roughly double the throughput in most workloads, with particular strength in data compression, encryption, and floating-point math. The 24 threads, 36 MB L3 cache, Gen 5 PCIe, and ECC memory support make it the clear choice for workstation-class tasks. The higher 45 W TDP is the trade-off for that performance, but the data shows no scenario where the Core 7 160UL's lower power draw translates into a benchmark win.

For users who prioritize single-threaded responsiveness in legacy applications, the Core 7 160UL's Passmark single-thread score of 3391 is only 1.2% behind the Core 9 273PTE's 3433, so the practical difference in such tasks may be minimal. However, the Core 9 273PTE still wins that category outright, and its Cinebench single-core lead of 54.1% shows that even lightly threaded modern workloads favor it substantially. The Core 7 160UL's 15 W TDP and lower core count position it as an efficiency-oriented part, but the recorded data provides no benchmark category where it outperforms the Core 9 273PTE.

The launch MSRP of the Core 9 273PTE is $549. The Core 7 160UL has no recorded launch MSRP. Both processors are active production parts on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 9 273PTE's newer March 2026 release date, versus April 2024 for the Core 7 160UL, aligns with its more advanced feature set including Gen 5 PCIe and ECC support.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 160UL | Intel Core 9 273PTE |

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

| Cores | 10 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 1.80 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 45 W |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | 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 | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Release Date | April 2024 | March 2026 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $549 |

| Part Number | Unknown | SA4QJ |