Intel Core 7 250H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every single head-to-head test against the Intel Core 7 250H, 17 wins to 0. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 250H sits in the 85th percentile. Its average benchmark score of 61834 places it alongside desktop-class processors like the Intel Core i9-13900KF, which scores 61841, and the Intel Core i9-13900K at 61766. The Core 7 250H, with an average score of 35728, sits near the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 at 35719 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H at 35670.

For workloads that demand heavy multi-threaded performance, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the clear choice. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41913 is more than double the 16561 of the Core 7 250H. Single-threaded tasks also favor the newer chip decisively, with a 5917 score in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1931. The data shows no scenario where the Core 7 250H pulls ahead. The only question is whether the older chip's lower power envelope, 45 watts versus 55 watts, matters for a given mobile chassis. Otherwise, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the superior part on every recorded metric.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and manufacturing nodes. The Core 7 250H uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, built by Intel. It is part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-HX) generation. Its 3 nm process node is fabricated by TSMC, not Intel. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus also has disclosed transistor and die size figures: 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 7 250H has no recorded transistor count or die size.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning the newer chip does not rely on hyper-threading to reach its thread count; every core corresponds to one thread. The Core 7 250H uses a mix of performance and efficiency cores to reach its 20 threads from 14 physical cores.

Cache hierarchies are also distinct. The Core 7 250H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. 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. These larger per-core caches support the newer architecture's higher throughput.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 7 250H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports only DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, but the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is listed for the Core 7 250H. The integrated graphics also differ: Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units on the Core 7 250H versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 7 250H does not. PCIe connectivity differs with 8 CPU lanes on the Core 7 250H and 20 CPU lanes on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus, both Gen 5.

FAQ

Q: Which chip has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores, while the Intel Core 7 250H has 14 cores. Both have 20 threads.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 5917 versus 1931 for the Core 7 250H, a gap of 67.4 percent in favor of the newer chip.

Q: How does the multi-core performance compare?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 41913 versus 16561, a 60.5 percent advantage. The PassMark multithread score shows 48270 for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus versus 27030 for the Core 7 250H, a 44 percent lead.

Q: Do both chips support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 7 250H supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports DDR5 only.

Q: What are the process node differences?

A: The Core 7 250H is built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is built on TSMC's 3 nm process.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 250H has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, which is higher than the 5.30 GHz boost clock of the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The base clocks are 2.50 GHz and 2.40 GHz, respectively.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across most core specification fields. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores versus 14 for the Core 7 250H; both have 20 threads. The Core 7 250H has a higher base clock at 2.50 GHz versus 2.40 GHz, and a higher boost clock at 5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. Thermal design power differs: the Core 7 250H is rated at 45 watts, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus at 55 watts.

Sockets are different: the Core 7 250H uses Intel BGA 1744, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 7 250H and 3 nm for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus, with the latter built by TSMC rather than Intel. Transistor count and die size are recorded only for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus: 17,800 million transistors and 243 mm².

Cache allocation per core is larger on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus: 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core versus 80 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core. Shared L3 cache is 30 MB versus 24 MB. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 7 250H, DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus records a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; the Core 7 250H has none listed. PCIe lanes are 8 on the Core 7 250H and 20 on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus, both Gen 5.

Integrated graphics units differ: Iris Xe Graphics with 96 EU on the Core 7 250H, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The multiplier is unlocked only on the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The Core 7 250H has a launch MSRP of $502; the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates differ as well: December 17, 2024 for the Core 7 250H and March 16, 2026 for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the newer chip scores 5917 versus 1931, a 67.4 percent lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 60.5 percent advantage with 41913 versus 16561. PassMark floating point math is also heavily one-sided: 163567 versus 65094, a 60.2 percent gap.

The smallest margin appears in PassMark single-thread, where the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 4764 versus 4148, a 12.9 percent advantage. PassMark integer math shows a 19.1 percent lead with 122449 versus 99100. Cinebench R15 multi-core has the newer chip at 4224 versus 3147, a 25.5 percent gap, while Cinebench R15 single-core shows 596 versus 298, a 50 percent difference.

Cinebench R20 results mirror the pattern: multi-core 17603 versus 9697 (44.9 percent ahead), single-core 2485 versus 1368 (44.9 percent ahead). PassMark data compression shows 493179 versus 303269, a 38.5 percent lead. Data encryption shows 37813 versus 18206, a 51.9 percent gap. Extended instructions score 39283 versus 17318, a 55.9 percent advantage. Find prime numbers shows 482 versus 106, a 78 percent lead, the largest relative gap in any test. Physics scores 3843 versus 1824, a 52.5 percent lead. Random string sorting shows 60020 versus 34136, a 43.1 percent gap. Multithread scores 48270 versus 27030, a 44 percent lead.

The percentile ranking confirms the overall picture: the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus at the 93rd percentile versus the Core 7 250H at the 85th. The average benchmark score of 61834 for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is nearly double the 35728 of the Core 7 250H.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every measured workload category. Multi-threaded rendering workloads show the largest differences. Cinebench R23 multi-core, R20 multi-core, and R15 multi-core all favor the newer chip by margins from 25.5 percent to 60.5 percent. This indicates strong scaling across 20 physical cores without hyper-threading overhead.

Single-threaded performance is also firmly in the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus camp. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 67.4 percent lead, and PassMark single-thread shows a 12.9 percent lead. The higher boost clock of the Core 7 250H, 5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz, does not translate into a win in any single-threaded test. The newer architecture's efficiency per clock is evidently superior.

Memory-intensive and data-processing workloads follow the same pattern. PassMark data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting all show leads between 38.5 percent and 55.9 percent for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. Floating point math shows a 60.2 percent gap, integer math a 19.1 percent gap. The physics workload, which often reflects gaming-related simulation performance, shows a 52.5 percent lead.

The Core 7 250H has no recorded wins in any benchmark. Its only advantages in the specification sheet are a higher base clock, a higher boost clock, lower TDP, broader memory compatibility (DDR4 and DDR5), and a 96 EU integrated GPU versus 64 EU. For users prioritizing lower power draw or legacy DDR4 support, the Core 7 250H may be the practical choice. For every measurable performance metric, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers a decisive victory, with an average benchmark score that rivals desktop processors like the Intel Core i9-13900KF. The data does not indicate any workload where the Core 7 250H provides a performance benefit.