Intel Core 7 360 vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core 9 273PQE wins every single recorded head-to-head test, taking all 17 comparisons. The margin of victory, however, varies dramatically by workload, and that spread tells the real story.

The largest gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 164,629 against the Core 7 360's 34,238, a delta of -79.2% from the Core 7's perspective. That is nearly a 4.8x advantage in raw integer throughput, a direct consequence of the Core 9's doubled core count and quadrupled thread count. Data compression shows a similar chasm: 585,752 versus 142,877, a 75.6% deficit for the Core 7 360. Extended instructions follow at -68% (38,743 vs 12,390), and multithreaded performance sits at -66.3% (46,107 vs 15,544).

Cinebench results are consistent with this pattern. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 9 273PQE posts 39,190 versus 13,634, a 65.2% gap. Every Cinebench multicore test, from R15 through R23, shows precisely the same -65.2% delta, indicating a very stable scaling relationship between the two parts. Single-core Cinebench results also favor the Core 9 273PQE by 65.2% in R20 and R23, and 65.4% in R15, though the absolute scores are much closer together.

The closest contest is PassMark single-thread performance. Here the Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 versus 4,274, a mere 6.5% advantage. This is the only test where the two processors approach parity, and it highlights that the Core 7 360's Wildcat Lake architecture, despite its modest core count, delivers competitive single-thread performance. Physics simulation shows the Core 9 273PQE ahead by 56% (2,754 vs 1,213), while floating-point math gives it a 64.2% edge (125,546 vs 44,963). Random string sorting favors the Core 9 273PQE by 66.8%, and data encryption by 62.3%. The narrowest gap outside single-thread is find prime numbers, where the Core 9 273PQE leads by 39.4% (198 vs 120), a test that depends heavily on integer execution efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design lineages. The Intel Core 7 360 is built on Wildcat Lake, a 3 nm process node, while the Intel Core 9 273PQE uses Bartlett Lake on a 10 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process difference is substantial: the Core 7 360 uses a 3 nm node, the Core 9 273PQE uses 10 nm.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Core 9 273PQE doubles the cores to 12 and quadruples the threads to 24. This explains the massive multicore deltas in the benchmark data.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 360 allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core 9 273PQE uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. Total L3 is therefore six times larger on the Core 9 273PQE, which matters for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core 9 273PQE also enables ECC memory, while the Core 7 360 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs by a full generation. The Core 7 360 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are also different: the Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, the Core 9 273PQE uses UHD Graphics 770.

The platform targets are distinct. The Core 7 360 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516, the Core 9 273PQE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700. The Core 7 360 has a 15 W TDP, the Core 9 273PQE draws 125 W. The release dates are close, with the Core 9 273PQE launching on 2026-03-08 and the Core 7 360 on 2026-04-15.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 7 360 records 0 wins.

Q: How close is single-thread performance between the two?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 versus 4,274 for the Core 7 360, a 6.5% difference. This is the smallest gap in the entire benchmark set.

Q: What is the largest performance gap?

A: PassMark integer math shows the biggest delta at -79.2%, with the Core 9 273PQE scoring 164,629 and the Core 7 360 scoring 34,238.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core 9 273PQE also supports ECC memory, the Core 7 360 does not.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The Core 7 360 uses a 3 nm process, the Core 9 273PQE uses a 10 nm process. Both are built by Intel.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 360 | Intel Core 9 273PQE |

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

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 6 | 24 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.90 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Bartlett Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| L1 cache | 192 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB per core | 2 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 36 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-03-08 |

| Launch MSRP | $426 | $589 |

The Verdict

The recorded data supports one clear conclusion: the Intel Core 9 273PQE is the dominant processor in every measured workload. Its 17 wins out of 17 head-to-head tests, combined with a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs versus the Core 7 360's 72nd percentile, leaves no ambiguity about overall performance. The average benchmark score for the Core 9 273PQE is 66,099, while the Core 7 360 averages 18,374.

The Core 9 273PQE sits in the same performance neighborhood as the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, with a delta of only 0.3% from that rival's average score. It also trades nearly evenly with the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at -0.1% and trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by 1.1%. The Core 7 360, by contrast, matches the Intel Core i3-13100 exactly at 0% delta and stays within 0.4% of the Intel Core 3 305.

The Core 7 360 is not a weak processor in absolute terms, but its role is clearly different. Its 6-core, 6-thread configuration with a 15 W TDP and mobile socket targets power-constrained systems. The Core 9 273PQE, with a 125 W TDP and desktop socket, prioritizes throughput above all else.

For users who need maximum multi-threaded performance, the Core 9 273PQE is the only choice in this comparison. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39,190 is nearly three times the Core 7 360's 13,634. For workloads that depend primarily on single-thread speed, the gap narrows to 6.5% in PassMark, but the Core 9 273PQE still leads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins in every category recorded. The largest advantages appear in integer-heavy and parallel workloads. PassMark integer math shows a 79.2% advantage, data compression a 75.6% advantage, and extended instructions a 68% advantage. These are workloads that scale with core count, thread count, and cache size, all areas where the Core 9 273PQE has overwhelming superiority.

Multithreaded rendering and content creation also belong to the Core 9 273PQE. Cinebench R23 multicore, R20 multicore, and R15 multicore all show a 65.2% lead. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth support large working sets that would thrash the Core 7 360's 6 MB L3 and single-channel 59.7 GB/s bus.

Data encryption favors the Core 9 273PQE by 62.3%, and floating-point math by 64.2%. Physics simulation gives the Core 9 273PQE a 56% margin. Random string sorting sits at 66.8%. Even the closest test, PassMark single-thread, goes to the Core 9 273PQE by 6.5%.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins no recorded benchmarks. Its strengths are contextual rather than comparative. The 15 W TDP makes it suitable for mobile platforms, and the 3 nm process node indicates a modern manufacturing approach. The single-thread gap of 6.5% shows that Wildcat Lake's architecture is competitive per clock, but the Core 7 360's lower base and boost clocks (1.50 GHz and 4.80 GHz versus 3.40 GHz and 5.90 GHz) keep it behind.

The Core 9 273PQE's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 0.3% above, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at 0.1% below, which frames it as a high-end desktop contender. The Core 7 360's nearest rivals cluster around the Intel Core i3-13100 and Core i3-14100, positioning it as an entry-level mobile part. The data does not support any scenario where the Core 7 360 outperforms the Core 9 273PQE, so the selection depends entirely on platform constraints: mobile integration with low power draw versus desktop performance with high throughput.