Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core 9 273PE, which wins 14 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The most dramatic gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the Core 9 273PE scores 139410 against 62070 for the Core Ultra 5 336H, a 124.6% advantage. This result indicates a fundamental difference in per-thread execution capability that carries over into several other workloads.

In Cinebench tests, the Core 9 273PE maintains a remarkably consistent lead across all six runs. Multi-core scores show a 30.4% advantage in both Cinebench R15 (3153 vs 2418) and Cinebench R20 (13140 vs 10076), with the same 30.4% margin in Cinebench R23 (31288 vs 23991). Single-core results follow the identical pattern: 30.5% in R15 (445 vs 341), 30.5% in R20 (1855 vs 1422), and 30.4% in R23 (4417 vs 3387). The consistency of this margin across different Cinebench versions suggests a stable architectural advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

PassMark data compression shows the second-largest delta, with the Core 9 273PE scoring 405885 against 280340, a 44.8% advantage. Random string sorting also favors the desktop part by 31.1% (45098 vs 34402), while floating point math sits at a 30.9% gap (107884 vs 82415). PassMark multithread delivers a 29% lead (36810 vs 28545), and physics testing shows a 16.3% edge (3120 vs 2682). Data encryption is closer at 6.7% (22719 vs 21291), and extended instructions are nearly identical, with only a 0.4% difference (24630 vs 24542).

The Core Ultra 5 336H claims two notable wins, both in PassMark workloads. Single-thread performance favors the mobile chip by 9% (4013 vs 3650), and prime number finding shows a 32.1% advantage (299 vs 203). These results indicate that the Panther Lake architecture excels at specific scalar integer operations despite trailing heavily in aggregate throughput.

The average benchmark scores place the Core 9 273PE at 49845, which ranks in the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core Ultra 5 336H averages 34485, landing in the 84th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PE are the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 with an average score of 49796 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49394 (0.9% behind), the Intel Core i9-13980HX at 50398 (1.1% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 at 50448 (1.2% ahead). The Core Ultra 5 336H sits within 0.8% of the Intel Core i7-13700HX (34554, 0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34333, 0.4% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (34260, 0.7% behind), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (34222, 0.8% behind).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Core 9 273PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 9 generation, built on a 10 nm process node. The Core Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake-H generation designation, manufactured on a 3 nm node. Both are produced by Intel, but the process gap is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm.

Core and thread counts diverge significantly. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The desktop part therefore uses simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count, whereas the mobile part runs one thread per core.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 9 273PE provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 336H offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The mobile chip has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, but the desktop chip has twice the total L3 capacity.

Clock speeds favor the desktop part. The Core 9 273PE has a 2.30 GHz base clock and a 5.70 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 5 336H runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. Power envelopes reflect their market segments: the Core 9 273PE has a 65 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 336H sips 25 W.

Memory support shows a split. The Core 9 273PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The mobile part's memory controller offers higher bandwidth despite a lower TDP. ECC memory is supported on the Core 9 273PE but not on the Core Ultra 5 336H.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 9 273PE exposes 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 336H provides 12. Integrated graphics are the UHD Graphics 730 on the desktop part versus Intel Xe3 Graphics on the mobile part. Sockets are naturally different: Intel Socket 1700 for the desktop chip, Intel BGA 2540 for the mobile chip. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE averages 49845 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H averages 34485.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 336H win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. It wins PassMark single-thread by 9% (4013 vs 3650) and PassMark find prime numbers by 32.1% (299 vs 203). It also edges out the Core 9 273PE on extended instructions by a 0.4% margin (24542 vs 24630, where the Core 9 still wins).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the desktop chip's multithreading yields a 29% higher PassMark multithread score (36810 vs 28545).

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The Core 9 273PE is built on a 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 5 336H uses a 3 nm node.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 9 273PE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 336H does not.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Core Ultra 5 336H has a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9 273PE, despite its lower 25 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 336H |

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

| Cores | 12 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.30 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.70 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Bartlett Lake | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| 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) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2026-03-08 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not available |

| Part number | SA4QD | SA4RD |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 9 273PE dominates in multi-threaded throughput, holding a 30.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and a 29% lead in PassMark multithread. Its integer math score is more than double that of the Core Ultra 5 336H, and it wins 14 of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The 90th percentile ranking versus 84th percentile confirms its higher standing in the database.

The Core Ultra 5 336H compensates with a smaller power envelope, a more advanced 3 nm process, higher memory bandwidth, and a narrow single-thread PassMark victory. Its 16 physical cores without multithreading still produce competitive multi-core results, though not enough to match the desktop part. The prime number finding win by 32.1% suggests the Panther Lake architecture handles certain scalar workloads efficiently, but this does not translate into broader application performance.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the Core 9 273PE is the stronger choice. It delivers higher scores in rendering, compression, floating point, and integer workloads. For scenarios where power consumption matters and the workload favors single-thread PassMark performance or prime number computation, the Core Ultra 5 336H offers specific advantages. The mobile chip's higher memory bandwidth and larger per-core caches provide architectural interest, but the benchmark record shows the desktop part winning the majority of measurable workloads by substantial margins.