Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 9 273PE and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H shows a decisive split, with the desktop part winning 10 of the 17 recorded tests and the mobile part taking 7. The largest margins belong to the Core 9 273PE, particularly in single-core and integer workloads.

In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 9 273PE scores 4417 against the Ultra 9 285H's 2129.5, a 107.4% advantage. This is the single biggest delta in the entire head-to-head set. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Core 9 273PE leads 445 to 313, a 42.2% gap. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 7.7% lead for the Core 9 273PE, with scores of 1855 versus 1722.

Multi-core Cinebench results are more mixed. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PE delivers 31288 versus 20781.5, a 50.6% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core favors the Core 9 273PE by 7.7% (13140 versus 12201). However, in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 9 285H wins narrowly, scoring 3177.5 against 3153, a 0.8% margin.

PassMark tests reveal a clear workload-dependent split. The Core 9 273PE dominates integer math with a 62.3% lead (139410 versus 85922), data compression with a 20.8% lead (405885 versus 335859), physics with a 24.2% lead (3120 versus 2513), random string sorting with a 10.2% lead (45098 versus 40931), and multithread with a 7.7% lead (36810 versus 34171).

The Ultra 9 285H counters with wins in several specialized PassMark tests. It leads in find prime numbers by 38.5% (330 versus 203), data encryption by 13.1% (26140 versus 22719), extended instructions by 8.1% (26794 versus 24630), floating point math by 1.2% (109190 versus 107884), and single thread by 17.3% (4415 versus 3650).

Average benchmark scores reflect these results. The Core 9 273PE has an average score of 49845 and sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 (49796, 0.1% behind), Intel Core i5-14600KF (49394, 0.9% behind), Intel Core i9-13980HX (50398, 1.1% ahead), and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 (50448, 1.2% ahead). The Ultra 9 285H averages 38312 and sits in the 86th percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core 9 270H (38335, 0.1% ahead), Intel Core i5-13600HX (38261, 0.1% behind), Intel Xeon w3-2525 (38392, 0.2% ahead), and AMD Ryzen 7 250 (38221, 0.2% behind).

The Verdict

The data points to a desktop-first design for the Core 9 273PE and a mobile-first design for the Ultra 9 285H. The Core 9 273PE is the clear choice for single-threaded and integer-heavy workloads. Its 107.4% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 62.3% lead in PassMark integer math are not subtle. Anyone running compilation, spreadsheet calculations, or lightly threaded applications should look at the Core 9 273PE's numbers as the stronger option.

The Ultra 9 285H wins where specialized instruction sets and encryption matter. Its 38.5% lead in find prime numbers and 13.1% lead in data encryption suggest workloads like cryptographic hashing or prime-search algorithms benefit from its architecture. The 17.3% single-thread PassMark lead also indicates strong per-thread performance in that specific test, even though Cinebench single-core tells the opposite story.

The Cinebench R15 multi-core result is the only multi-core test the Ultra 9 285H wins, but it is marginal at 0.8%. In contrast, the Core 9 273PE wins Cinebench R20 multi-core by 7.7% and Cinebench R23 multi-core by 50.6%. The average benchmark score gap is substantial: 49845 versus 38312, a 30.1% difference in favor of the Core 9 273PE.

For users who need a desktop processor with strong single-core and multi-core Cinebench scores, the Core 9 273PE is the better fit. For mobile users who need encryption throughput and specialized instruction performance, the Ultra 9 285H offers specific advantages. The data does not show a single winner across all tests; it shows two processors tuned for different environments.

Architecture Differences

The Core 9 273PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built by Intel on a 10 nm process. It is a desktop part with an Intel Socket 1700. The Ultra 9 285H uses the Arrow Lake-H codename and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. It is a mobile part with an Intel BGA 2049 socket.

The core counts differ significantly. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Ultra 9 285H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Core 9 273PE relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 24 threads, while the Ultra 9 285H has more physical cores but no extra threads. The thread count difference of 8 threads favors the Core 9 273PE in heavily threaded workloads, which matches its Cinebench R23 multi-core lead.

Cache layouts also differ. The Core 9 273PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 9 285H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 9 285H has larger per-core caches, but the Core 9 273PE has 12 MB more shared L3.

The integrated graphics are another differentiator. The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 9 285H uses Arc Graphics 140T. Both are integrated solutions, but the Arc branding suggests a different feature set for the mobile part.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 273PE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 9 285H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The memory bandwidth figures favor the Ultra 9 285H: 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9 273PE. Both are dual-channel and both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity is not equal. The Core 9 273PE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 9 285H offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This gives the desktop part twice the CPU PCIe lane count.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in clock speeds. The Core 9 273PE has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The Ultra 9 285H has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Core 9 273PE has a higher boost clock by 0.30 GHz, while the Ultra 9 285H has a higher base clock by 0.60 GHz.

Thermal design power differs by 20 watts. The Core 9 273PE is rated at 65 W TDP, while the Ultra 9 285H is rated at 45 W TDP. This reflects the desktop versus mobile positioning.

Release dates are different. The Core 9 273PE was released on 2026-03-08, while the Ultra 9 285H was released on 2025-01-12. The launch MSRP for the Core 9 273PE is $549, and for the Ultra 9 285H it is $651.

The Core 9 273PE belongs to the Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) generation, and the Ultra 9 285H belongs to the Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-H) generation. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are SA4QD for the Core 9 273PE and SRQAL for the Ultra 9 285H. Both are Active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core Cinebench performance?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE wins every Cinebench single-core test. It leads by 42.2% in R15, 7.7% in R20, and 107.4% in R23.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE has 24 threads versus 16 threads for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H, even though the Ultra 9 285H has more physical cores (16 versus 12).

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin in either direction?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core 9 273PE leads by 107.4%. The largest win for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it leads by 38.5%.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285H has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the Intel Core 9 273PE.

Q: Which processor is in the higher performance percentile?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE is in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H is in the 86th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE has 16 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H has 8 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only).