Intel Core 7 253PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

The Intel Core 7 253PQE and Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus occupy opposite ends of the performance spectrum, despite both carrying Intel branding. The data shows a clear split: the 253PQE dominates in certain single-core legacy tests, while the 290HX Plus wins nearly every other benchmark by substantial margins. With 15 wins against 2 for the Core 7, the 290HX Plus is the overwhelming performance leader in the database, though the specific nature of those wins reveals important nuances for workload selection.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in Cinebench results. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Core 7 253PQE scores 446 against 340 for the 290HX Plus, a 31.2% advantage. The gap widens in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 253PQE posts 4431 versus 2356, an 88.1% lead. However, the 290HX Plus reverses this entirely in multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 290HX Plus scores 5981 versus 3163, a 47.1% deficit for the Core 7. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 21198 against 13183, a 37.8% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows this to 39684 versus 31390, a 20.9% difference.

The 290HX Plus also wins the more modern single-core test, Cinebench R20 single-core, with 2992 against 1861, another 37.8% margin. This inconsistency between single-core tests suggests architectural differences in how each processor handles varying instruction loads.

PassMark results follow a similar pattern. The 290HX Plus wins all 9 PassMark tests listed. The largest margins come in find prime numbers, where the 290HX Plus scores 519 against 206, a 60.3% lead. Floating point math shows 201773 versus 105279, a 47.8% gap. Data encryption delivers 50008 against 25515, a 49% advantage. Extended instructions show 51290 versus 32390, a 36.8% difference. Data compression scores 658724 versus 487335, a 26% lead. Random string sorting posts 80327 against 54222, a 32.5% margin. Integer math shows 164839 versus 137795, a 16.4% gap. Multi-thread scores 59439 versus 41656, a 29.9% difference. Physics results are closer, with 3387 against 2970, only 12.3% apart. Even the smallest PassMark win, single-thread at 4951 versus 4389, still favors the 290HX Plus by 11.4%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The Core 7 253PQE is built on Intel's 10 nm process using the Bartlett Lake codename, while the 290HX Plus uses TSMC's 3 nm process with the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename. The 290HX Plus contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the database records no transistor or die size figures for the 253PQE.

Core counts differ substantially. The 253PQE has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The 253PQE uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 20 threads from 10 cores, whereas the 290HX Plus has no thread doubling, relying on raw core count. Cache hierarchies also differ. The 253PQE has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 33 MB shared L3. The 290HX Plus has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3.

Clock speeds favor the Core 7 in base frequency, with 3.50 GHz against 2.70 GHz for the 290HX Plus. Boost clocks are closer, with the 253PQE reaching 5.70 GHz and the 290HX Plus reaching 5.50 GHz. The 253PQE carries a 125 W TDP, while the 290HX Plus is rated at 55 W.

Memory support differs as well. The 253PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the 290HX Plus supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The 290HX Plus has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the 253PQE. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes differ, with the 253PQE offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes and the 290HX Plus offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

Integrated graphics also differ. The 253PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the 290HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The 253PQE uses the Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop segment, while the 290HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114 and targets mobile. The 253PQE has its multiplier locked; the 290HX Plus has it unlocked.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 253PQE wins exclusively in two Cinebench single-core tests: R15 and R23. These results indicate strong legacy single-threaded performance, likely benefiting from its higher base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The 88.1% lead in R23 single-core is particularly striking, suggesting workloads that rely on older instruction paths may run considerably faster on the 253PQE.

The 290HX Plus wins everywhere else. Its 24 physical cores provide massive multi-threaded throughput advantages, from 20.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core up to 47.1% in Cinebench R15 multi-core. The PassMark suite shows consistent wins across all categories, with particularly strong showings in prime number calculation, data encryption, and floating point math. The 290HX Plus also wins the more modern Cinebench R20 single-core test, indicating its architecture handles contemporary single-thread workloads better despite the 253PQE's higher clock speeds.

The 290HX Plus also wins the PassMark single-thread test by 11.4%, further confirming that its architectural efficiency compensates for its lower clock speeds in most single-core scenarios. The physics test, a proxy for simulation workloads, shows the 290HX Plus ahead by 12.3%, a narrower margin than most other tests but still a clear victory.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most buyers. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins 15 of 17 benchmarks and holds a 95th percentile ranking against all CPUs, compared to the 91st percentile for the Core 7 253PQE. Its average benchmark score of 79574 far exceeds the 55919 for the 253PQE. The 290HX Plus delivers superior performance in data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithreaded workloads, and physics simulations. It also wins the more modern single-core tests.

The Core 7 253PQE appeals only to users running legacy single-threaded applications that resemble Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core loads. Its 31.2% and 88.1% wins in those tests are substantial, and its 5.70 GHz boost clock gives it an edge in lightly threaded older software. The 253PQE also supports DDR4 memory, which may matter for systems reusing existing memory kits.

The 290HX Plus offers a better overall package for modern workloads, with higher memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and a more advanced 3 nm process. Its 55 W TDP against 125 W for the 253PQE makes it more power-efficient on paper, and the unlocked multiplier provides overclocking headroom that the 253PQE lacks. The 253PQE has a launch MSRP of $409, but the 290HX Plus has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

For users prioritizing maximum multi-threaded performance, modern single-core speed, and efficiency, the 290HX Plus is the clear choice from the recorded data. For those running specific legacy single-threaded applications, the 253PQE offers a measurable advantage that may justify its selection.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core 7 253PQE wins 2.

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

A: The 290HX Plus leads by 47.1% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 37.8% in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 20.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. PassMark multi-thread shows a 29.9% advantage.

Q: Does the Core 7 253PQE win any single-core tests?

A: Yes, it wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 31.2% and Cinebench R23 single-core by 88.1%. The 290HX Plus wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 37.8% and PassMark single-thread by 11.4%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 7 253PQE has 10 cores and 20 threads. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The Core 7 253PQE has a 3.50 GHz base clock and 5.70 GHz boost clock. The 290HX Plus has a 2.70 GHz base clock and 5.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core 7 253PQE and the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus support ECC memory.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 253PQE | Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus |

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

| Cores | 10 | 24 |

| Threads | 20 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 33 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |