Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX dominates the head-to-head comparison, winning 14 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. Its advantage is consistent and often substantial, with the largest gaps appearing in integer-heavy and cryptographic workloads. The Intel Core 9 273PE manages only three wins, but those victories are decisive in specific areas that point to a different design philosophy.

The single-threaded gap is the most telling. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 4568 against 4417 for the Core 9 273PE, a 3.3% advantage. That same 3.3% delta appears across every Cinebench test, both R15, R20, and R23, and in both single-core and multi-core runs. The Core Ultra 5 245HX posts 32358 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 31288 for the Core 9 273PE, and the R20 multi-core result is 13590 versus 13140. The consistency of this 3.3% edge across all six Cinebench tests suggests a fundamental per-core efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark results reveal a more complex picture. The Core Ultra 5 245HX wins PassMark single-thread with 4481 versus 3650, an 18.5% margin that is far larger than the Cinebench single-core gap. It also leads in multi-thread with 38069 versus 36810, another 3.3% win. The encryption test shows a massive 24.3% lead for the Core Ultra 5 245HX, scoring 30022 against 22719. Extended instructions follow with a 21.1% lead, 31212 versus 24630. Prime number finding is the largest single deltas at 43.5%, with the Core Ultra 5 245HX scoring 359 versus 203. Floating-point math goes to the Core Ultra 5 245HX by 10.6%, 120735 versus 107884, and random string sorting is a 5.3% win, 47616 versus 45098.

The Core 9 273PE takes its wins where thread count and memory bandwidth matter. Integer math is its standout victory, scoring 139410 against 92150, an extraordinary 51.3% lead. Data compression goes to the Core 9 273PE by 3.3%, 405885 versus 393071. Physics simulation is the third win, with 3120 against 2526, a 23.5% margin.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture. The Core 9 273PE averages 49845 across all tests, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX averages 48287. Both sit at the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Core 9 273PE's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 at 0.1% behind, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX sits 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Core 9 273PE is built on Bartlett Lake, a 10 nm process manufactured by Intel, and targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX uses Arrow Lake-HX, a 3 nm process from TSMC, and is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2114. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm, which explains much of the efficiency gap.

Core counts differ in an unusual way. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, meaning every core supports two threads. The Core Ultra 5 245HX has 14 cores but only 14 threads, indicating no simultaneous multithreading. Despite fewer threads (24 versus 14), the Core Ultra 5 245HX wins most multi-threaded tests, which speaks to the power of its newer architecture and higher base clock.

Clock speeds favor the Core 9 273PE in boost but the Core Ultra 5 245HX in base. The Core 9 273PE boosts to 5.70 GHz with a 2.30 GHz base, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX boosts to 5.10 GHz with a 3.10 GHz base. The higher boost clock on the Core 9 273PE does not translate into single-thread wins, while the higher base clock on the Core Ultra 5 245HX likely contributes to its consistent efficiency.

Cache hierarchies are notably different. The Core 9 273PE has 80 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, with 36 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 245HX has 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, but only 24 MB shared L3. The larger per-core caches on the Core Ultra 5 245HX align with its strong per-thread performance, while the larger shared L3 on the Core 9 273PE benefits its 24-thread workload.

Memory support diverges. The Core 9 273PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 245HX supports only DDR5 but with higher bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s. The Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory; the Core Ultra 5 245HX does not. PCIe lanes also differ: 16 lanes for the Core 9 273PE versus 20 lanes for the Core Ultra 5 245HX, both Gen 5.

Integrated graphics differ significantly. The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU. The Core Ultra 5 245HX also has a larger transistor count at 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, though the Core 9 273PE lists no transistor or die size data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX is the clear choice for general-purpose computing, single-threaded responsiveness, and cryptographic workloads. Its 18.5% lead in PassMark single-thread performance suggests snappier day-to-day operation. The 24.3% encryption advantage and 21.1% extended instructions lead make it suitable for security-sensitive tasks and workloads using modern instruction sets. The 43.5% lead in prime number finding indicates strong integer processing in specific mathematical contexts.

The Core Ultra 5 245HX also wins in floating-point math by 10.6%, which covers scientific computing, rendering, and other FP-heavy applications. Its consistent 3.3% lead across all Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, makes it the better all-rounder for content creation workflows that rely on those benchmarks.

The Intel Core 9 273PE wins where raw integer throughput and specific simulation workloads dominate. The 51.3% lead in integer math is the largest margin in the entire comparison, pointing to strengths in compression, encryption (despite losing the encryption test), and general integer-heavy code. Data compression is a 3.3% win, which aligns with its larger L3 cache and 24 threads. Physics simulation shows a 23.5% lead, suggesting better performance in physics-based game engines or simulation software.

The Core 9 273PE also benefits from its 24 threads in scenarios that scale with thread count, even though the Core Ultra 5 245HX wins the multi-threaded benchmarks overall. The gap in multi-threaded tests is only 3.3%, which means the Core 9 273PE is competitive in heavily threaded workloads despite losing most of them.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX wins every single-thread benchmark. It leads by 3.3% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, and by 18.5% in PassMark single-thread (4481 versus 3650).

Q: How do the multi-threaded scores compare despite the Core 9 273PE having 24 threads to 14?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245HX still wins multi-threaded Cinebench and PassMark tests by 3.3%, despite having 10 fewer threads. Its 3 nm process and higher base clock of 3.10 GHz compensate for the thread count disadvantage.

Q: Where does the Core 9 273PE have its biggest advantage?

A: The largest win for the Core 9 273PE is PassMark integer math, where it scores 139410 versus 92150, a 51.3% lead. It also wins physics simulation by 23.5% and data compression by 3.3%.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245HX has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 9 273PE has 89.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Core 9 273PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX supports only DDR5.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Core 9 273PE has a higher average benchmark score at 49845 versus 48287 for the Core Ultra 5 245HX, despite losing 14 of 17 head-to-head tests. Both are at the 90th percentile among all CPUs.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX for most users. It wins 14 of 17 benchmarks, including every Cinebench test, all single-thread tests, and the majority of PassMark workloads. Its 3 nm process from TSMC delivers efficiency that overcomes a significant thread count disadvantage. The 18.5% single-thread lead and 24.3% encryption advantage make it the better choice for interactive work, security applications, and modern software that benefits from newer instruction sets.

The Intel Core 9 273PE is the specialist choice for integer-heavy workloads. Its 51.3% lead in integer math is not a marginal edge; it is a dominant performance category. The 23.5% physics win and 3.3% compression victory, combined with ECC memory support, position it for specific professional and server-like tasks. The 24 threads and larger 36 MB L3 cache serve workloads that can use them, even if most benchmarks do not favor it.

For a mobile user or anyone seeking general-purpose performance, the Core Ultra 5 245HX is the clear winner. For a desktop user running integer-heavy code, physics simulation, or requiring ECC memory, the Core 9 273PE has a defined role. The 3.3% gap in most multi-threaded tests is small, but the 51.3% integer math margin is decisive in its favor for that specific workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX |

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

| Cores | 12 | 14 |

| Threads | 24 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-HX |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 243 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

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

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not listed |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SA4QD | SRVFM |