Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core 9 273PE, which claims 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H secures the remaining 4 wins. The margin of victory is not uniform, however, and the specific workloads tell a more nuanced story than the aggregate score alone.

The most lopsided result in the entire dataset is in PassMark integer math. The Core 9 273PE scores 139410 against 74247 for the Core Ultra 5 235H, a difference of 87.8%. This is a massive gap that points to a fundamental throughput advantage in integer-heavy desktop workloads. Similarly, the PassMark physics test shows the Core 9 273PE at 3120 versus 1985, a 57.2% lead. These two results are the clearest evidence of the Core 9 273PE's raw compute dominance.

The Cinebench suite reinforces this pattern across every single test. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 9 273PE scores 31288 while the Core Ultra 5 235H scores 25598, a 22.2% advantage. The single-core variant shows 4417 versus 3613, a 22.3% lead. This consistency carries through R15 and R20 as well: every Cinebench subtest records a delta of either 22.2% or 22.3% in favor of the Core 9 273PE. The uniformity of these margins suggests a clock-and-architecture advantage that scales linearly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads.

PassMark multithread delivers 36810 for the Core 9 273PE versus 30091 for the Core Ultra 5 235H, a 22.3% margin that aligns closely with the Cinebench results. Floating-point math also favors the desktop part, with 107884 against 93509, a 15.4% lead. Data compression shows a larger gap: 405885 versus 301979, a 34.4% advantage. Random string sorting records 45098 versus 36208, a 24.6% lead. Extended instructions land at 24630 versus 23354, a more modest 5.5% edge.

The Core Ultra 5 235H does claim four wins, and they are worth examining closely. The PassMark single-thread test is the most striking: the mobile chip scores 4359 against 3650 for the Core 9 273PE, a 16.3% advantage. This is a significant single-core victory, and it appears twice in the dataset under the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries, both recording identical scores and the same delta. The Core Ultra 5 235H also wins PassMark data encryption with 23121 versus 22719, a narrow 1.7% margin. The final win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the mobile part scores 239 against 203, a 15.1% lead.

The average benchmark score for the Core 9 273PE is 49845, placing it at the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 at 49796, a delta of 0.1%. The Intel Core i9-13980HX sits 1.1% higher, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 sits 1.2% higher. The Core Ultra 5 235H averages 37522, which places it at the 85th percentile. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-13600K at 37685, a 0.4% gap, with the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F 0.6% behind and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 0.6% ahead.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE wins 13 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H wins 4.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two processors?

A: The PassMark integer math test shows the Core 9 273PE ahead by 87.8%, with a score of 139410 versus 74247.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H win any benchmark by a wide margin?

A: Yes. The PassMark single-thread test (recorded under two identical entries) shows the Core Ultra 5 235H ahead by 16.3%, scoring 4359 versus 3650. It also wins the find prime numbers test by 15.1%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core 9 273PE scores 31288 in multicore and 4417 in single-core. The Core Ultra 5 235H scores 25598 in multicore and 3613 in single-core. The Core 9 273PE leads by 22.2% and 22.3% respectively.

Q: Where does each processor rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: The Core 9 273PE sits at the 90th percentile with an average benchmark score of 49845. The Core Ultra 5 235H sits at the 85th percentile with an average score of 37522.

Q: How close are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: The Core 9 273PE's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, which is 0.1% higher in average score. The Core Ultra 5 235H's closest rival is the Intel Core i5-13600K, which is 0.4% higher.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Core 9 273PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 9 generation. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-H codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. This is a significant process node gap, with the mobile chip using a far more advanced manufacturing node.

Core counts differ in an important way. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, meaning it supports simultaneous multithreading with 2 threads per core. The Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 cores but only 14 threads, indicating no multithreading per core. Despite having two fewer physical cores, the Core 9 273PE presents 10 more logical threads to the operating system. This explains part of its multicore benchmark dominance.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. 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 235H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The desktop chip therefore has twice the L3 capacity, while the mobile chip has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 273PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 5 235H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The mobile chip records a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the desktop part. The Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory; the Core Ultra 5 235H does not.

PCIe connectivity shows another divergence. The Core 9 273PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 235H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 235H uses Arc Graphics 140T. The socket types are entirely incompatible: the Core 9 273PE uses Intel Socket 1700 for desktop, and the Core Ultra 5 235H uses Intel BGA 2049 for mobile.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several distinct differences between the two parts. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads. Base clocks are close: 2.30 GHz for the Core 9 273PE and 2.40 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 235H. Boost clocks differ more substantially: 5.70 GHz for the Core 9 273PE versus 5.00 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 235H.

Thermal design power shows a major split. The Core 9 273PE is rated at 65 W, while the Core Ultra 5 235H is rated at 28 W. This reflects their market segments: the Core 9 273PE is a desktop part, and the Core Ultra 5 235H is a mobile part. The process node differs (10 nm versus 3 nm), as does the foundry (Intel versus TSMC). L3 cache is 36 MB shared versus 18 MB shared. Memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5 for the desktop chip, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the mobile chip. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. ECC support is present on the Core 9 273PE and absent on the Core Ultra 5 235H. PCIe lanes from the CPU are 16 versus 8. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc Graphics 140T. The socket is Socket 1700 versus BGA 2049. The Core 9 273PE has a launch MSRP of $549; the Core Ultra 5 235H has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates differ, with the Core Ultra 5 235H released earlier and the Core 9 273PE released later in the recorded timeline.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core 9 273PE is the stronger processor in the vast majority of workloads, winning 13 of 17 comparisons. Its leads are especially pronounced in integer math, physics, data compression, and every Cinebench test. The 87.8% margin in integer math and the 57.2% margin in physics are the kind of results that separate desktop compute parts from mobile efficiency parts. The consistent 22.2% to 22.3% margins across all Cinebench tests indicate a stable, architecture-level advantage in rendering workloads.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is not without merit. Its 16.3% single-thread victory in PassMark is notable, and it also wins in prime number finding and data encryption. The higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and the larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may contribute to these results. The 3 nm process from TSMC and the 28 W TDP make it a far more power-efficient design, which is appropriate for its mobile market segment.

Buyers choosing between these parts will be guided primarily by platform and workload. The Core 9 273PE is a desktop processor on Socket 1700 with a 65 W TDP, 24 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and a 5.70 GHz boost clock. It delivers the higher average benchmark score of 49845 and the 90th percentile ranking. The Core Ultra 5 235H is a mobile processor on BGA 2049 with a 28 W TDP, 14 threads, 18 MB of L3 cache, and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. It delivers an average score of 37522 and an 85th percentile ranking. For maximum compute throughput, the data favors the Core 9 273PE. For efficiency-oriented mobile systems, the Core Ultra 5 235H is the recorded option, with its single-thread strength and lower power envelope providing a distinct profile.