Intel Core 9 270H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive outcome: the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every single recorded comparison, 17 wins to zero for the Intel Core 9 270H. The margin is substantial across both synthetic rendering workloads and general computational tests, with the smallest recorded gap still favoring the Ultra 7 by a meaningful 17.2%.

In Cinebench R23, the multi-core test shows the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scoring 41913 against 18000 for the Core 9 270H, a 57.1% advantage. The single-core R23 result is even more lopsided: 5917 versus 2040, a 65.5% lead. This indicates the Ultra 7's architectural improvements deliver not just more aggregate throughput but also significantly stronger per-thread performance, which matters for lightly threaded applications.

The older Cinebench versions follow the same pattern. In R20 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 17603 versus 10268, a 41.7% lead. The R20 single-core result is 2485 against 1449, also a 41.7% gap. R15 shows identical percentage margins, with the Ultra 7 reaching 4224 multi-core and 596 single-core versus 2464 and 347 respectively. The consistency of the 41.7% delta across three Cinebench generations suggests a fundamental performance ceiling difference rather than workload-specific scaling.

PassMark tests reveal where the Ultra 7 excels most. The find prime numbers test shows the largest relative gap: the Ultra 7 scores 482 against 112, a 76.8% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to integer arithmetic and branch prediction, so the result points to a major efficiency gain in the newer core design. Floating point math also favors the Ultra 7 heavily, 163567 versus 70640, a 56.8% lead.

Data encryption shows the Ultra 7 at 37813 versus 19369, a 48.8% margin, while extended instructions deliver 39283 versus 20079, also a 48.9% gap. The physics test mirrors this at 3843 versus 1966, a 48.8% difference. Integer math is comparatively closer: the Ultra 7 scores 122449 against 97654, a 20.2% lead, making it the narrowest multi-threaded gap in the PassMark suite.

Memory and storage oriented workloads also favor the Ultra 7. Data compression shows 493179 against 333785, a 32.3% lead. Random string sorting delivers 60020 versus 36867, a 38.6% margin. The multithread aggregate score is 48270 versus 28764, a 40.4% difference. Single-thread PassMark scores, which are often the closest comparison between generations, still give the Ultra 7 a clear 17.2% edge at 4764 versus 3944.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture: the Ultra 7 sits at 61834, while the Core 9 270H averages 38335. The Ultra 7 ranks at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, compared to the 86th percentile for the Core 9 270H. Notably, the Ultra 7's average score places it alongside desktop-class parts such as the Intel Core i9-13900KF, which sits within 0.1% of its average, while the Core 9 270H's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H with a 0.1% difference and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 with a 0.3% difference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 5917 versus 2040 for the Core 9 270H, a 65.5% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows 4764 versus 3944, a 17.2% lead.

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

A: The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the Ultra 7 scoring 41913 against 18000, a 57.1% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 17603 versus 10268, a 41.7% gap. The PassMark multithread score is 48270 versus 28764, a 40.4% difference.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 270H has a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock, the Ultra 7 still wins all single-thread benchmarks by a wide margin.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads. Both processors therefore expose the same thread count, but the Ultra 7 does so with more physical cores and no hyper-threading.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Core 9 270H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The database does not record any graphics benchmark scores for either processor.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus ranks at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 9 270H ranks at the 86th percentile. The Ultra 7's average benchmark score is 61834, versus 38335 for the Core 9 270H.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus as the stronger processor in every measured category. It holds a 57.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, a 65.5% lead in R23 single-core, and a 76.8% lead in the PassMark prime number test. Its average benchmark score of 61834 places it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals are desktop-class parts like the Intel Core i9-13900KF, which scores within 0.1% of it. The Core 9 270H, by contrast, averages 38335 and sits at the 86th percentile, with nearest rivals that include the Core Ultra 9 285H and the AMD Ryzen 7 250.

The Core 9 270H does hold a higher boost clock at 5.80 GHz versus 5.30 GHz, and it has a higher launch MSRP of $697, but the benchmark results do not translate that clock advantage into any performance win. The Ultra 7's single-core scores are dramatically higher despite the lower boost clock, indicating that its architectural efficiency outweighs the raw frequency difference. Users running rendering workloads, compression tasks, encryption, or any of the PassMark suites should expect the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus to deliver meaningfully better results. The Core 9 270H remains a functional mobile processor, but the data provides no scenario in which it outperforms the Ultra 7 in the recorded tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The Core 9 270H uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114, meaning they are not socket compatible. The Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads, whereas the Ultra 7 has 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks differ at 2.70 GHz for the Core 9 270H and 2.40 GHz for the Ultra 7, while boost clocks are 5.80 GHz and 5.30 GHz respectively. Thermal design power is 45 watts for the Core 9 270H and 55 watts for the Ultra 7.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 270H supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 7 records a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 9 270H has no recorded bandwidth figure. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the Core 9 270H provides Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics differ between the two. The Core 9 270H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The multiplier is locked on the Core 9 270H and unlocked on the Ultra 7. Production status is Active for both, but the release dates are not the same. The Core 9 270H has a recorded launch MSRP of $697, while the Ultra 7 has no recorded launch MSRP. Part numbers are SRQ6V for the Core 9 270H and SADST for the Ultra 7.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The Core 9 270H is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-H codename, and belongs to the Core 9 generation with a Raptor Lake Refresh designation. Its process node is 10 nm, fabricated by Intel. The Ultra 7 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family, uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, and is part of the Ultra 7 generation under the Arrow Lake-HX designation. Its process node is 3 nm, fabricated by TSMC, and it records 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 9 270H has no recorded transistor count or die size.

Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. The Core 9 270H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. These larger per-core caches likely contribute to the Ultra 7's single-thread advantage, as more data can reside closer to the execution units.

The transistor count and die size differences reflect the newer manufacturing process. The 3 nm TSMC node allows for a higher transistor density compared to the 10 nm Intel node, which is consistent with the Ultra 7's higher core count and larger cache allocations. The Ultra 7 also features an unlocked multiplier, indicating it is positioned for overclocking, while the Core 9 270H is locked. The combination of a newer process, larger caches, more cores, and a different foundry makes the Ultra 7 a significantly different silicon design rather than an incremental revision of the Core 9 270H.