Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 9 273PE compare to the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL in overall benchmark standing?

A: The Core 9 273PE sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL sits at the 50th percentile. The Core 9 273PE has an average benchmark score of 49845, whereas the Core Ultra 5 125HL has no recorded benchmark scores, resulting in an average score of 0.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations of these two processors?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. Despite having fewer physical cores, the Core 9 273PE offers more threads due to its hyperthreading capability.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speeds?

A: The Core 9 273PE has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Core 9 273PE is substantially faster in both metrics.

Q: How does the cache hierarchy differ between the two?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PE doubles the L3 cache.

Q: What process nodes are used for each processor?

A: The Core 9 273PE uses a 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses a 7 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL does not. Both processors support dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a clear picture for system builders. The Core 9 273PE delivers a fully populated benchmark suite with strong scores across rendering, encryption, and math workloads. Its 90th percentile ranking places it among the top decile of all CPUs in the database. The Core Ultra 5 125HL, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile, which appears to reflect its unmeasured status rather than actual performance.

For workloads that demand high multithreaded throughput, the Core 9 273PE is the only option with recorded data to support a recommendation. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 31288 and Passmark multithread score of 36810 indicate strong parallel processing capability. The Core Ultra 5 125HL cannot be evaluated on the same terms because the database contains no measurements for it.

The Core 9 273PE also offers a higher boost clock of 5.70 GHz versus 4.50 GHz, double the L3 cache at 36 MB versus 18 MB, and ECC memory support. It uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Core Ultra 5 125HL uses the newer Intel Socket 1851, PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes, and integrates Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 112 execution units.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL does have advantages in the specification sheet. It uses a smaller 7 nm process node, features more physical cores at 14 versus 12, and has a lower TDP of 45 watts versus 65 watts. Its integrated graphics are more capable on paper, though no benchmark data exists to quantify the difference.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, so no direct comparisons can be drawn from matching test runs. However, the Core 9 273PE's standalone benchmark results provide substantial data points for analysis.

In Cinebench R23, the Core 9 273PE scores 31288 in multicore and 4417 in single-core. The R20 results show 13140 multicore and 1855 single-core. The R15 results show 3153 multicore and 445 single-core. These scores indicate consistent scaling across render workloads of varying intensity.

Passmark results for the Core 9 273PE show 36810 in multithread, 3650 in single-thread, 107884 in floating point math, and 139410 in integer math. Data compression scores 405885, while data encryption scores 22719. Extended instructions score 24630, and find prime numbers scores 203. Physics scores 3120, and random string sorting scores 45098.

The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PE provide useful context. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has an average score of 49796, which is 0.1 percent behind the Core 9 273PE's 49845. The Intel Core i5-14600KF scores 49394, placing it 0.9 percent behind. The Intel Core i9-13980HX scores 50398, which is 1.1 percent ahead. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 scores 50448, 1.2 percent ahead.

These delta values show the Core 9 273PE trading blows with high-end mobile and desktop parts. It sits within a narrow 1.2 percent band of four capable rivals, indicating that its performance profile is competitive with some of the fastest processors in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. The thread count difference is notable, as the Core 9 273PE provides 6 more threads despite 2 fewer physical cores.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The Core 9 273PE runs at 2.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost. The Core Ultra 5 125HL runs at 1.20 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The Core 9 273PE's boost clock is 1.20 GHz higher, which directly impacts single-threaded performance.

Thermal design power differs by 20 watts. The Core 9 273PE has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has a TDP of 45 watts. This makes the Core Ultra 5 125HL the more power-efficient option on paper.

Socket compatibility separates the two entirely. The Core 9 273PE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Intel Socket 1851. These are not interchangeable platforms.

Memory support shows another divergence. The Core 9 273PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL supports DDR5 with the note that memory depends on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel buses with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

ECC memory is supported on the Core 9 273PE but not on the Core Ultra 5 125HL. PCIe capabilities also differ, with the Core 9 273PE offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes and the Core Ultra 5 125HL offering Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 112 execution units.

Architecture Differences

The Core 9 273PE belongs to the Bartlett Lake generation with the codename Bartlett Lake. The Core Ultra 5 125HL belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 with the Meteor Lake architecture and the codename Meteor Lake-PS. These are fundamentally different processor designs from different eras.

The process node tells part of the story. The Core 9 273PE uses a 10 nm node, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses a 7 nm node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the smaller node on the Core Ultra 5 125HL suggests a more modern manufacturing process.

Cache architecture reveals design philosophy differences. The Core 9 273PE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 125HL provides 112 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PE's larger L3 cache likely benefits workloads with large working sets.

The generation labels confirm the architectural gap. The Core 9 273PE is labeled Core 9 (Bartlett Lake), while the Core Ultra 5 125HL is labeled Ultra 5 (Meteor Lake-PS). The release dates in the database show the Core Ultra 5 125HL arriving earlier in 2024 and the Core 9 273PE arriving later in 2026.

The Core 9 273PE has a launch MSRP of $549. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has a launch MSRP of $325. Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither supports unlocked overclocking.

The Core 9 273PE has the part number SA4QD, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has the part number SRN9D. The Core Ultra 5 125HL is explicitly part of the Core Ultra Series 1 family, while the Core 9 273PE has no series designation.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PE wins wherever benchmark scores matter, simply because it has recorded performance data and the Core Ultra 5 125HL does not. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 9 273PE scores 31288, which places it in strong standing for heavily threaded render workloads. Its single-core score of 4417 indicates solid per-thread performance as well.

The Core 9 273PE also wins on platform capabilities. It offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which supports faster storage and expansion options. Its ECC memory support appeals to reliability-focused builds. The larger 36 MB L3 cache helps with data reuse patterns. The 65 watt TDP allows for higher sustained clocks under load.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL wins on efficiency metrics. Its 45 watt TDP is lower by 20 watts, which reduces cooling requirements and power draw. The 7 nm process node suggests better transistor density and potentially better power efficiency per computation. Its 14 physical cores provide more raw core count, which could benefit certain workloads if thread scheduling allows.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL also wins on integrated graphics capability. The Arc Xe-LPG with 112 execution units is a more substantial GPU than the UHD Graphics 730 in the Core 9 273PE. Systems using the Core Ultra 5 125HL without a discrete GPU would likely handle graphical tasks better.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL carries a launch MSRP of $325, which is lower than the Core 9 273PE's launch MSRP of $549. This price difference reflects the different positioning of the two parts in Intel's lineup.

The Core 9 273PE wins on memory flexibility with DDR4 and DDR5 support, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL supports only DDR5. The Core 9 273PE's socket 1700 platform offers broader motherboard compatibility with existing Intel 12th, 13th, and 14th generation boards, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL requires the newer socket 1851 platform.

The nearest rival data for the Core 9 273PE shows it competing within 1.2 percent of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, Intel Core i5-14600KF, Intel Core i9-13980HX, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370. This places it in a performance tier where small deltas determine ranking order. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has no rival data, leaving its competitive position undefined by the database.

For users prioritizing measured performance, the Core 9 273PE is the clear choice from the available data. For users prioritizing lower power consumption and a more capable integrated GPU, the Core Ultra 5 125HL offers specifications that may suit those needs, though no benchmark data confirms its real-world performance.