Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 238V Comparison

Intel Core 9 273PE and Intel Core Ultra 5 238V occupy opposite ends of Intel's current lineup, and the benchmark data reflects a clear performance hierarchy. The Core 9 273PE is a desktop part designed for maximum throughput, while the Core Ultra 5 238V is a mobile processor built for efficiency. The recorded measurements show the Core 9 273PE winning 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, with the Core Ultra 5 238V taking only the two single-thread PassMark tests. This analysis breaks down where each processor excels, what separates them architecturally, and which user should choose which based strictly on the data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PE dominates every multi-threaded and compute-intensive workload in the database. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 31288 against 15645 for the Core Ultra 5 238V, a 100% advantage. The same pattern holds across PassMark tests: integer math shows a 258.5% lead (139410 vs 38889), floating-point math shows a 102.9% lead (107884 vs 53160), and data compression shows a 129.9% lead (405885 vs 176532). This processor is built for sustained parallel workloads, rendering, and heavy computation.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V wins only in PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread tests, scoring 3890 in both, against 3650 for the Core 9 273PE. That is a 6.2% advantage. This is a narrow win, but it indicates the Lunar Lake architecture has a slightly faster single-core execution path in the PassMark suite. The Core Ultra 5 238V also sits at the 75th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 9 273PE sits at the 90th percentile, confirming the desktop part has greater overall capability in the database's aggregate scoring.

The use-case split is simple: the Core 9 273PE for any workload that scales with cores, threads, or cache, and the Core Ultra 5 238V for single-threaded tasks where its slightly higher PassMark score matters. The data shows no other scenario where the mobile chip comes out ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use entirely different silicon designs. The Core 9 273PE is built on Intel's 10 nm process and uses the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 5 238V uses the Lunar Lake architecture on a 3 nm process fabricated by TSMC. This process difference explains the power gap: the Core 9 273PE has a 65 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 238V draws only 17 W. The Core 9 273PE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, whereas the Core Ultra 5 238V is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2833.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 238V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 9 273PE therefore has both more physical cores and hyper-threading, doubling its thread count. Cache configurations also favor the desktop chip: the Core 9 273PE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB of L2 per core, while the Core Ultra 5 238V has only 8 MB of shared L3 and 2.5 MB of L2 per core. The Core 9 273PE has a larger L1 at 80 KB per core, but the Core Ultra 5 238V has a larger L1 at 192 KB per core.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 273PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory support. The Core Ultra 5 238V supports dual-channel memory but the database lists its memory support as depending on the motherboard, with no bandwidth figure recorded and no ECC support. PCIe lanes also differ: the Core 9 273PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 238V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes.

Integrated graphics are another divergence. The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, a basic desktop iGPU. The Core Ultra 5 238V uses Arc 130V, which is a more capable mobile graphics solution, though the database does not record benchmark scores for either iGPU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a consistent doubling of performance for the Core 9 273PE. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 3153 against 1576, a 100.1% delta. R15 single-core shows 445 against 222, a 100.5% delta. R20 multi-core shows 13140 against 6570, exactly 100% ahead. R20 single-core shows 1855 against 927, a 100.1% delta. R23 multi-core shows 31288 against 15645, exactly 100% ahead. R23 single-core shows 4417 against 2208, exactly 100% ahead. Every Cinebench test, both multi-core and single-core, lands at roughly double the score.

PassMark results show a wider spread. The largest gap is in integer math, where the Core 9 273PE scores 139410 against 38889, a 258.5% advantage. Floating-point math shows 107884 against 53160, a 102.9% delta. Data compression shows 405885 against 176532, a 129.9% delta. Data encryption shows 22719 against 13072, a 73.8% delta. Extended instructions show 24630 against 15377, a 60.2% delta. Random string sorting shows 45098 against 21585, a 108.9% delta. Physics shows 3120 against 1546, a 101.8% delta. Find prime numbers shows 203 against 174, a smaller 16.7% delta. Multi-thread shows 36810 against 18407, exactly 100% ahead.

The Core Ultra 5 238V wins only PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread, both scoring 3890 against 3650, a 6.2% delta in its favor. This is the only benchmark category where the mobile chip outperforms, and the margin is small compared to the Core 9 273PE's leads elsewhere.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for most users. The Intel Core 9 273PE delivers roughly double the performance in Cinebench multi-core tests and leads by large margins in PassMark integer math, floating-point math, and data compression. It is the 90th percentile CPU in the database, with an average benchmark score of 49845. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i5-14600KF (0.9% lower), and the Intel Core i9-13980HX (1.1% higher), placing it firmly in high-end desktop territory.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V is a different proposition. Its 75th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 21981 put it in the same range as the Intel Core i7-11700F and AMD Ryzen 5 3600X, both with 0% delta. It is a mobile chip with a 17 W TDP, suited for laptops where battery life and heat matter more than raw throughput. Its 6.2% single-thread PassMark win over the Core 9 273PE is real but narrow, and it does not compensate for the massive multi-core deficit.

Users who need a desktop processor for rendering, compilation, virtualization, or any parallel workload should choose the Core 9 273PE. Users who need a mobile processor for everyday tasks, light productivity, and portability should choose the Core Ultra 5 238V, accepting the performance trade-off for the power efficiency. The database shows no scenario where the Core Ultra 5 238V is the stronger choice for compute-heavy work.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE wins every multi-core benchmark in the database. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 31288 against 15645, a 100% advantage. PassMark multi-thread shows 36810 against 18407, also exactly 100% ahead.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 238V win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread tests, scoring 3890 in both, against 3650 for the Core 9 273PE. That is a 6.2% advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 5 238V has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How does the cache size compare?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 2 MB of L2 per core. The Core Ultra 5 238V has 8 MB of shared L3 and 2.5 MB of L2 per core.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core 9 273PE has a 65 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 238V has a 17 W TDP.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 238V does not.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 238V |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 | 2.10 |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 | 4.70 |

| TDP | 65 | 17 |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

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

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 130V |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not recorded |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 90 | 75 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 49845 | 21981 |