Intel Core 7 160UL vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the dominant processor in this comparison. The recorded data shows it wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 7 160UL. Its average benchmark score of 61,834 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 160UL sits at 14,232 and the 69th percentile. The performance gap is decisive across every workload category, from single-threaded tasks to heavy multi-threaded rendering.

The Core 7 160UL is positioned as a low-power desktop option. With a 15 W TDP and a 10-core, 12-thread configuration, it delivers moderate results that place it near the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C and Intel Core i5-10400F in the database rankings. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus, with its 20 cores, 20 threads, and 55 W TDP, is in an entirely different performance class, matching the average scores of the Intel Core i9-13900KF and Core i9-13900K.

Users who need maximum compute throughput should select the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus without hesitation. The data supports only one conclusion: the Core 7 160UL cannot match the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus in any measured benchmark, and the latter should be chosen for any application where performance is the primary criterion. The Core 7 160UL remains relevant only for scenarios where its lower power envelope and desktop socket are the deciding factors.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and manufacturing strategies. The Core 7 160UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process node. It uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, fabricated on TSMC's 3 nm process node, and mounts on Intel BGA 2114.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ substantially. The Core 7 160UL has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. This process advantage, combined with a larger physical design, supports the performance disparity.

Core and thread configurations differ significantly. The Core 7 160UL offers 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement where some cores lack hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus provides 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning all cores are physical with no simultaneous multi-threading. The cache hierarchy also diverges. The Core 7 160UL has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core 7 160UL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. PCIe connectivity is another differentiator: the Core 7 160UL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Core 7 160UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is unlocked for overclocking, while the Core 7 160UL is locked. The market segments are different: the Core 7 160UL is a desktop part, and the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a mobile part. Release dates are recorded as April 2024 for the Core 7 160UL and March 2026 for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows no wins for the Core 7 160UL across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every comparison. The single-threaded tests show the smallest relative gap, while multi-threaded and specialized instruction tests show the largest.

The Core 7 160UL's closest performance point is in the PassMark single-thread test, where it scores 3,391 against 4,764 for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus, a delta of -28.8%. This indicates that in lightly threaded workloads, the Core 7 160UL is relatively less disadvantaged, though still clearly behind. Its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 5.30 GHz helps narrow the gap in single-core scenarios.

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus dominates in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 41,913 versus 9,386, a delta of -77.6%. The PassMark integer math test shows the smallest multi-threaded delta at -61.2%, with scores of 122,449 versus 47,515. The largest deltas appear in specialized workloads: PassMark find prime numbers shows -89.6%, and PassMark extended instructions shows -85.2%.

For data compression, encryption, floating-point math, physics simulation, and random string sorting, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers scores that are multiples of the Core 7 160UL's results. The Core 7 160UL's role is limited to low-power desktop systems where the 15 W TDP and Socket 1700 compatibility are requirements. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the choice for any performance-sensitive mobile or high-end desktop application.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has an average benchmark score of 61,834, compared to 14,232 for the Intel Core 7 160UL. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 160UL sits in the 69th percentile.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a TDP of 55 W.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports only DDR5.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL uses a 10 nm process node from Intel. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses a 3 nm process node from TSMC.

Q: Is either processor unlocked for overclocking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Core 7 160UL does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks. The Cinebench tests show consistent deltas of approximately -77.6% to -77.7% in favor of the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the scores are 4,224 versus 946. In Cinebench R15 single-core, they are 596 versus 133. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 17,603 versus 3,942, and single-core shows 2,485 versus 556. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers 41,913 versus 9,386, and single-core delivers 5,917 versus 1,325.

The PassMark suite reveals varying deltas. The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 4,764 against 3,391, a delta of -28.8%. The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 482 against 50, a delta of -89.6%. PassMark extended instructions shows 39,283 versus 5,832, a delta of -85.2%. PassMark floating-point math shows 163,567 versus 25,670, a delta of -84.3%.

PassMark data encryption shows 37,813 versus 7,146, a delta of -81.1%. PassMark random string sorting shows 60,020 versus 11,843, a delta of -80.3%. PassMark physics shows 3,843 versus 819, a delta of -78.7%. PassMark data compression shows 493,179 versus 108,953, a delta of -77.9%. PassMark multithread shows 48,270 versus 11,043, a delta of -77.1%. PassMark integer math shows 122,449 versus 47,515, a delta of -61.2%.

The nearest rivals in the database confirm the positioning of each chip. The Core 7 160UL's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C, with an average score of 14,277 and a delta of -0.3%. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus's closest competitor is the Intel Core i9-13900KF, with an average score of 61,841 and a delta of 0%. This places the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus in the same performance tier as flagship desktop processors from a prior generation, while the Core 7 160UL competes with entry-level and mid-range parts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are 1.80 GHz for the Core 7 160UL and 2.40 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. Boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 5.30 GHz respectively.

TDP is a major differentiator: 15 W for the Core 7 160UL versus 55 W for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. Sockets differ entirely: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 7 160UL and Intel BGA 2114 for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 7 160UL and 3 nm for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The foundry is Intel for the former and TSMC for the latter.

Cache configurations differ across all levels. The Core 7 160UL has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 7 160UL has no recorded values for either.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 7 160UL, DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; the Core 7 160UL has no recorded bandwidth. PCIe capabilities differ as well: Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes for the Core 7 160UL, Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe Graphics 96EU for the Core 7 160UL, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The market segment is Desktop for the Core 7 160UL and Mobile for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The multiplier is unlocked only on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. Both have non-ECC memory support. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a recorded part number of SADST, while the Core 7 160UL lists unknown.