Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 256V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints an extremely lopsided picture in favor of the Intel Core 9 273PE. Out of 17 head-to-head tests, the Core 9 273PE wins 15, while the Core Ultra 7 256V manages only 2 victories. The scale of the Core 9 273PE's advantage is substantial in most workloads, often exceeding 80% and sometimes surpassing 200%.

The largest single margin comes in PassMark integer math, where the Core 9 273PE scores 139410 against the Core Ultra 7 256V's 43358. That is a 221.5% advantage, indicating the desktop part handles arithmetic-heavy integer workloads at nearly three times the throughput. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a similar story: 31288 versus 10399, a 200.9% lead. This is the most demanding rendering workload in the dataset, and the Core 9 273PE essentially triples the output of the mobile chip.

Data compression is another major win. The Core 9 273PE scores 405885 in PassMark data compression versus 184985 for the Core Ultra 7 256V, a 119.4% difference. Random string sorting follows at 100.6% (45098 versus 22481). These results indicate that the Core 9 273PE is dramatically faster in tasks that manipulate large in-memory datasets.

The Core 9 273PE also dominates in floating-point math, scoring 107884 versus 58576, a 84.2% lead. Physics simulation shows 3120 versus 1595, a 95.6% gap. Multithreaded PassMark scores 36810 versus 19530, an 88.5% advantage. Encryption workloads favor the desktop chip by 62.3% (22719 versus 13998), and extended instruction throughput is 57.5% higher (24630 versus 15643).

Cinebench results are consistently one-sided. R15 multi-core shows 3153 versus 1583.5, a 99.1% lead. R15 single-core is 445 versus 285.5, a 55.9% gap. R20 multi-core shows 13140 versus 6958, an 88.8% advantage, and R20 single-core is 1855 versus 982, an 88.9% lead. R23 single-core scores 4417 versus 1877.5, a 135.3% margin. Notably, the single-core Cinebench margins are much larger than the single-thread PassMark result, which is the one area where the Ultra 7 256V actually wins.

The smallest Core 9 273PE win is in PassMark find prime numbers: 203 versus 192, just a 5.7% difference. This suggests the two chips are nearly equivalent in this specific integer-heavy single-threaded workload.

The Core Ultra 7 256V's only wins come in PassMark single-thread and the duplicate PassMark singlethread test, both scoring 4029 versus 3650. That is a 9.4% advantage for the mobile chip. This is curious because the Core 9 273PE has a much higher boost clock, but the PassMark single-thread test appears to favor the Lunar Lake architecture's efficiency design.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PE is the clear choice for any workload that scales with core count and thread count. It has 12 cores and 24 threads versus 8 cores and 8 threads for the Ultra 7 256V. The data confirms this in multi-threaded rendering, where Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 200.9% lead. Video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation would all benefit from this kind of advantage. The same applies to data processing tasks: compression, encryption, and sorting all show at least a 62.3% lead for the desktop part.

The Core 9 273PE also dominates in floating-point and integer math. The 221.5% lead in integer math and the 84.2% lead in floating-point math indicate that scientific computing, financial modeling, and engineering simulation workloads will run far faster on the desktop chip. Physics simulation, which often relies on floating-point throughput, shows a 95.6% advantage.

The Core Ultra 7 256V's wins are narrow and specific. The 9.4% lead in PassMark single-thread performance suggests it handles lightly threaded, latency-sensitive tasks with better efficiency. This could translate to snappier response in older software that uses a single primary thread, or in daily desktop usage where burst performance matters. However, the Cinebench single-core results contradict this: the Core 9 273PE leads by 55.9% in R15, 88.9% in R20, and 135.3% in R23. The PassMark single-thread test likely measures a different workload mix, possibly one that favors the Lunar Lake memory architecture or the newer process node.

The Core Ultra 7 256V is a mobile processor with a 17 TDP, while the Core 9 273PE is a desktop part with a 65 TDP. The data shows that the Ultra 7 256V is competitive only in the narrow single-thread PassMark test. In every other measured workload, the desktop chip is faster, often by a wide margin. For battery-powered laptops where the Ultra 7 256V lives, the performance profile is acceptable, but it is not in the same class as the Core 9 273PE for sustained throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Core 9 273PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 7 256V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. This process difference explains some of the efficiency gap: the mobile chip achieves its performance at a much lower 17 TDP, while the desktop chip consumes up to 65 TDP.

Core topology is fundamentally different. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support. The Core Ultra 7 256V has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no multithreading per core. This is a structural difference that explains the massive multi-core margins. The Core 9 273PE can process twice as many threads simultaneously, which directly translates to the 200.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Cache hierarchies also diverge significantly. The Core 9 273PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 256V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The desktop chip has three times the shared L3 cache, which helps with larger working sets. The mobile chip has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which may explain its better PassMark single-thread result despite the lower clock speed.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 273PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a measured bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 256V supports dual-channel memory but the database does not list a specific bandwidth figure, and its memory support is described as depending on the motherboard. It does not support ECC memory.

PCIe lane allocation is another major difference. The Core 9 273PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 7 256V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. This means the desktop chip can support a full-speed graphics card and multiple NVMe drives directly from the CPU, while the mobile chip is limited to a single high-speed device or requires a hub.

Integrated graphics are completely different. The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, a basic desktop solution. The Core Ultra 7 256V uses Arc 140V, which is a much more capable mobile GPU. The database does not include benchmark results for the integrated GPUs, but the naming and market positioning suggest the Arc 140V is intended for light gaming and media work, while UHD Graphics 730 is for basic display output.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 9 273PE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The Core Ultra 7 256V uses Intel BGA 2833, a soldered mobile package. There is no upgrade path between them. The release dates also differ: the Core 9 273PE launched in early 2026, while the Core Ultra 7 256V launched in late 2024.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE boosts to 5.70 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 256V support ECC memory?

A: No, the database lists ECC memory support as false for the Core Ultra 7 256V. The Core 9 273PE does support ECC memory.

Q: Which chip is better for multi-threaded rendering?

A: The Core 9 273PE wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 200.9%, scoring 31288 versus 10399. Its 12 cores and 24 threads far outmatch the Ultra 7 256V's 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Core Ultra 7 256V beats the Core 9 273PE?

A: Yes, the PassMark single-thread test and the duplicate PassMark singlethread test both show the Ultra 7 256V ahead by 9.4%, scoring 4029 versus 3650.

Q: What process node does each chip use?

A: The Core 9 273PE uses a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Core Ultra 7 256V uses a 3 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each CPU provide?

A: The Core 9 273PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Core Ultra 7 256V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes.

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 256V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PE | Intel Core Ultra 7 256V |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 17 W |

| 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 | 12 MB shared |

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

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

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 140V |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not listed |

| Part Number | SA4QD | SRPMPSRPMZ |

The memory bus is dual-channel for both chips. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are listed as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core 9 273PE is the faster processor in 15 of 17 tests, with margins that range from 5.7% to 221.5%. It wins every multi-threaded test by at least 84.2% and most single-threaded Cinebench tests by over 55%. The 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with 36 MB of L3 cache and 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, make it the superior choice for rendering, simulation, data processing, and any workload that uses more than a couple of threads.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V should be chosen only for its specific strengths. It wins the PassMark single-thread test by 9.4%, and its 17 TDP makes it suitable for battery-powered laptops. The 3 nm process at TSMC and the larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may explain the single-thread efficiency, but the overall average benchmark score of 21112 puts it at the 75th percentile, while the Core 9 273PE sits at the 90th percentile with an average score of 49845.

For a desktop system where power draw is not the primary constraint, the Core 9 273PE is the clear pick. It supports ECC memory, has triple the L3 cache, provides four times the PCIe lanes, and offers a boost clock nearly 1 GHz higher. The $549 launch MSRP reflects its positioning as a high-end desktop processor. The Core Ultra 7 256V, with no listed launch MSRP and a mobile BGA package, cannot be installed in a desktop Socket 1700 board. Its role is in thin-and-light laptops where the 17 TDP and the Arc 140V integrated graphics make it a reasonable choice, but the recorded data shows it is not competitive with the Core 9 273PE in raw computational throughput.