Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison

The Intel Core 9 273PE and Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL are both desktop processors from Intel, but they target completely different performance brackets. The benchmark data shows a massive performance gulf between them, with the Core 9 273PE winning all 17 head-to-head tests. The average benchmark score for the Core 9 273PE is 49845, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL averages 13061, sitting in the 68th percentile. This is not a close contest by any metric, and the following analysis breaks down exactly where each chip stands.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 9 273PE dominates every single benchmark in the database. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PE scores 31288 against 8742 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, a delta of 257.9%. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 4417 versus 1234, again a 257.9% advantage. These percentages are consistent across the Cinebench suite, with R15 multi-core showing 3153 against 881 (257.9%) and R20 multi-core showing 13140 against 3671 (257.9%). The single-core R15 test shows 445 versus 124 (258.9%), and R20 single-core shows 1855 versus 518 (258.1%).

PassMark results tell a similar story, though the margins vary by workload. The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 9 273PE scores 203 against 44, a 361.4% advantage. PassMark extended instructions shows 24630 versus 5634, a 337.2% delta. PassMark physics shows 3120 versus 718, a 334.5% gap. Data compression shows 405885 versus 93961, a 332% delta. Random string sorting shows 45098 versus 11179, a 303.4% gap. Floating point math shows 107884 versus 30750, a 250.8% delta. Data encryption shows 22719 versus 6354, a 257.6% gap. Integer math shows 139410 versus 41171, a 238.6% delta. PassMark multi-thread shows 36810 versus 10285, a 257.9% gap.

The narrowest margin by far is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core 9 273PE scores 3650 and the Core Ultra 3 105UL scores 3382, a delta of just 7.9%. This is the only test where the two processors are in the same ballpark. The single-thread result suggests that for lightly threaded tasks, the Core Ultra 3 105UL is far more competitive than the multi-core results would imply. Still, the Core 9 273PE wins even this test, and its advantage in every other workload is between roughly 2.4x and 3.6x.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel generations and use different process nodes. The Core 9 273PE is part of the Bartlett Lake generation, built on a 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 3 105UL belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1, using the Meteor Lake architecture on a 7 nm process. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the process difference is notable: the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses a smaller node.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads. The thread difference is more than just a 2x core count gap; the Core 9 273PE supports Hyper-Threading on all cores, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL only adds 2 extra threads over its core count.

Cache layouts are also different. The Core 9 273PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, but only 10 MB of shared L3. The L1 per-core figure is actually higher on the Core Ultra 3 105UL, but the total L3 cache is 3.6x larger on the Core 9 273PE.

Clock speeds show the Core 9 273PE operating at 2.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost, versus 1.50 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. The power envelope is radically different: the Core 9 273PE has a TDP of 65, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL is rated at 15. That 50-point TDP gap explains much of the performance difference, as the Core 9 273PE has far more thermal headroom to sustain high clocks.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 273PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL supports DDR5 with the specific type depending on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel memory buses with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the Core 9 273PE but not on the Core Ultra 3 105UL.

PCIe connectivity is another divider. The Core 9 273PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Arc Xe-LPG 48EU.

Sockets are incompatible. The Core 9 273PE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Intel Socket 1851. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The release dates are also different, with the Core 9 273PE released in March 2026 and the Core Ultra 3 105UL released in April 2024.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PE wins in every single benchmark category recorded, but the magnitude of the win varies by workload type. For heavily parallel workloads like Cinebench R23 multi-core and PassMark multi-thread, the Core 9 273PE delivers roughly 3.6x the performance of the Core Ultra 3 105UL. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration combined with the 5.70 GHz boost clock makes it the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, and other tasks that scale with core count and thread count.

The biggest relative advantage for the Core 9 273PE appears in prime number finding and extended instruction workloads, where its delta exceeds 360% and 337% respectively. These tests are sensitive to both raw frequency and cache size, and the Core 9 273PE has a 1.50 GHz higher boost clock and 26 MB more L3 cache.

The Core Ultra 3 105UL does have one area where it is competitive: PassMark single-thread. Its score of 3382 is only 7.9% behind the Core 9 273PE's 3650. For everyday desktop tasks like web browsing, office applications, and light productivity, the Core Ultra 3 105UL will feel nearly as responsive as the Core 9 273PE, despite its much lower core count and TDP.

The power draw is the Core Ultra 3 105UL's main advantage. With a TDP of 15 versus 65, it consumes a fraction of the power. Systems built around it can use smaller coolers, lower-wattage power supplies, and more compact chassis. The Core 9 273PE requires substantially more cooling and power delivery hardware. For a low-power desktop or a system that prioritizes efficiency, the Core Ultra 3 105UL is the practical option, provided the workload does not demand heavy multi-core throughput.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core 9 273PE in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PE scores 31288 versus 8742 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, a 257.9% advantage. The same delta appears in R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 3 105UL competitive in single-threaded tasks?

A: The PassMark single-thread test shows the Core Ultra 3 105UL at 3382 versus 3650 for the Core 9 273PE, a 7.9% gap. This is the closest result in the entire benchmark suite.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Do these processors use the same motherboard socket?

A: No. The Core 9 273PE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Intel Socket 1851. They are not interchangeable.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Core 9 273PE has a TDP of 65, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL has a TDP of 15. The Core Ultra 3 105UL requires substantially less power and cooling.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 3 105UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the integrated graphics on each chip?

A: The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Arc Xe-LPG 48EU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PE | Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 10 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 65 | 15 |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Meteor Lake-PS |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 7 nm |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, depends on motherboard |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG 48EU |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | $295 |

| Release Date | March 2026 | April 2024 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core 9 273PE outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL in every single recorded test, with deltas ranging from 7.9% in single-thread to 361.4% in prime number finding. Its average benchmark score of 49845 places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL's 13061 average puts it in the 68th percentile. The Core 9 273PE is the correct choice for any workload that demands multi-core performance, including rendering, compilation, data processing, and heavy multitasking.

The Core Ultra 3 105UL is not without its place. Its 15 TDP makes it suitable for compact, low-power systems where the 65 TDP of the Core 9 273PE is impractical. Its single-thread score of 3382 shows it can handle everyday tasks with only a 7.9% deficit against a chip that costs more and draws over four times the power. For a basic office desktop, a media center, or a low-power server, the Core Ultra 3 105UL provides adequate performance with minimal power draw.

The decision comes down to workload and system constraints. Users who need maximum compute throughput should select the Core 9 273PE. Users who prioritize low power consumption and modest desktop workloads can work with the Core Ultra 3 105UL, accepting the large multi-core gap. The data does not suggest any scenario where the Core Ultra 3 105UL wins a performance test, but its power efficiency and lower launch MSRP of $295 versus $549 give it a distinct role in the desktop market.