Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL Comparison

Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 9 273PQE delivers substantially higher performance across every measured benchmark in the database, though the comparison is limited by the complete absence of recorded benchmark scores for the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL. The Core 9 273PQE posts a multi-core score of 39,190 in Cinebench R23, a single-core score of 5,532 in the same test, and a Cinebench R15 multi-core result of 3,950. Its Cinebench R20 numbers reach 16,459 multi-core and 2,323 single-core. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has no entries in any of these tests, so no direct delta can be calculated from the recorded measurements.

The Core 9 273PQE also shows strong results in PassMark workloads. It scores 585,752 in data compression, 29,636 in data encryption, 38,743 in extended instructions, 125,546 in floating point math, 164,629 in integer math, 46,107 in multithread, 2,754 in physics, 53,167 in random string sorting, and 4,573 in single thread. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has zero recorded benchmark results in the database, meaning its average benchmark score is 0 and its percentile rank sits at 50 among all CPUs. The Core 9 273PQE, by contrast, holds a 93rd percentile position across all CPUs.

Because the head-to-head benchmark array is empty and winsA and winsB are both zero, the data cannot provide a direct comparison of specific test outcomes. What the data does show is that the Core 9 273PQE is a high-performing desktop processor with a complete benchmark profile, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has no measured scores to analyze. The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PQE, based on average benchmark score, include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66,159, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65,914, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66,855, and the AMD EPYC 4465P at 66,925. The Core 9 273PQE averages 66,099, which puts it 0.1 percent behind the 250KF Plus, 0.3 percent ahead of the Ryzen 9 7950X3D, 1.1 percent behind the 250K Plus, and 1.2 percent behind the EPYC 4465P.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use different manufacturing nodes. The Core 9 273PQE is based on the Bartlett Lake codename, belongs to the Core 9 generation, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 125HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS codename, is part of the Core Ultra Series 1, and is built on a 7 nm process, also by Intel. The Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Intel Socket 1851.

Core counts differ notably. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores but only 18 threads, meaning its thread count is lower than its core count, which points to a hybrid arrangement where some cores do not support additional threads. The Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 125HL runs at a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Cache hierarchies are also different. The Core 9 273PQE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 125HL offers 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 cache difference is substantial: the Core 9 273PQE has exactly double the shared L3 capacity of the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 273PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL supports DDR5 only, with the note that support depends on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel memory buses, and both have the same memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Core 9 273PQE but not on the Core Ultra 5 125HL. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 9 273PQE uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics present another divergence. The Core 9 273PQE includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL includes Arc Xe-LPG 112EU. The power envelope is markedly different: the Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125, and the Core Ultra 5 125HL has a TDP of 45. Both processors are locked, with multiplier unlocked set to false, and both are listed as active production parts. The Core 9 273PQE was released on 2026-03-08, and the Core Ultra 5 125HL was released on 2024-04-07.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL has more cores, 14 versus 12 for the Intel Core 9 273PQE, but the Core 9 273PQE has more threads, 24 versus 18.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PQE has twice the L3 cache of the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has ECC memory support, but the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor supports faster PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Q: Are there any recorded benchmark scores for the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL?

A: No. The database contains no benchmark entries for the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL, so its average benchmark score is 0 and its percentile rank is 50. The Intel Core 9 273PQE, in contrast, has 17 recorded benchmark scores and ranks in the 93rd percentile.

Q: What are the release dates for these processors?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE was released on 2026-03-08, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL was released on 2024-04-07.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core 9 273PQE as the stronger performer by a wide margin. Its benchmark profile is complete, with a 93rd percentile rank among all CPUs and an average benchmark score of 66,099. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL has no benchmark scores at all, leaving its performance unmeasured and its percentile rank at 50. The Core 9 273PQE also has a higher boost clock, 5.90 GHz versus 4.50 GHz, a larger shared L3 cache, 36 MB versus 18 MB, support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and a higher TDP of 125 versus 45.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL does have advantages in specific areas. It uses a smaller process node at 7 nm versus 10 nm, has more cores at 14 versus 12, offers more L1 cache per core at 112 KB versus 80 KB, and integrates Arc Xe-LPG 112EU graphics, which is a different GPU solution than the UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 9 273PQE. Its lower TDP of 45 suggests a more power-efficient design, though the database does not include power consumption measurements to confirm that interpretation.

For workloads that rely on single-threaded and multi-threaded compute, the Core 9 273PQE is the only option with recorded evidence of capability. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,190 and single-core score of 5,532 place it in a high-performance tier. The nearest rivals to the Core 9 273PQE, including the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D and Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, all have average scores within roughly 1 percent of the Core 9 273PQE, which situates it in competitive company.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL, without any benchmark data, cannot be positioned in the same way. Its 14 cores and 18 threads suggest a hybrid design that may favor certain parallel tasks, but no measured scores exist to validate that expectation. The absence of data means no conclusion about its real-world performance can be drawn from the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several specification fields. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 9 generation, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses the Meteor Lake-PS codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1. The process nodes differ: 10 nm for the Core 9 273PQE and 7 nm for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Sockets differ: Socket 1700 for the Core 9 273PQE and Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

Core and thread counts differ: 12 cores and 24 threads for the Core 9 273PQE, 14 cores and 18 threads for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE and 1.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Boost clocks are 5.90 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE and 4.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. TDP values are 125 for the Core 9 273PQE and 45 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL.

L1 cache per core is 80 KB for the Core 9 273PQE and 112 KB for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. L2 cache per core is 2 MB for both. L3 cache is 36 MB shared for the Core 9 273PQE and 18 MB shared for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 9 273PQE, DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. ECC memory is true for the Core 9 273PQE and false for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Core 9 273PQE and Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 for the Core 9 273PQE and Arc Xe-LPG 112EU for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Release dates are 2026-03-08 for the Core 9 273PQE and 2024-04-07 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Launch MSRP is $589 for the Core 9 273PQE and $325 for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Part numbers are SA4Q9 for the Core 9 273PQE and SRN9D for the Core Ultra 5 125HL. Both processors have multiplier unlocked set to false and both are active production parts.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins in every benchmark category where data exists. Its Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 scores all indicate high multi-core and single-core throughput. The PassMark suite shows strength in integer math at 164,629, floating point math at 125,546, data compression at 585,752, and multithread at 46,107. These results make it suitable for compute-heavy desktop workloads such as rendering, compilation, and data processing, though the database does not specify those use cases directly.

The Core 9 273PQE also wins on connectivity and memory features. It supports DDR4 and DDR5, ECC memory, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and has a larger L3 cache. These features give it broader compatibility and more headroom for high-throughput storage and expansion cards.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL wins in areas unrelated to measured performance. It has more physical cores, 14 versus 12, and a higher L1 cache per core at 112 KB versus 80 KB. Its 7 nm process node is smaller than the 10 nm node of the Core 9 273PQE. Its TDP of 45 is lower than 125, which indicates a lower power envelope by specification. It integrates Arc Xe-LPG 112EU graphics, which are a different architecture than the UHD Graphics 770 in the Core 9 273PQE.

In terms of release timing, the Core Ultra 5 125HL came out earlier, on 2024-04-07, while the Core 9 273PQE arrived later, on 2026-03-08. The Core Ultra 5 125HL also has a lower launch MSRP of $325 compared to $589 for the Core 9 273PQE. However, without benchmark scores for the Core Ultra 5 125HL, no performance-based win can be assigned to it. The database records no wins for either processor in the head-to-head array, and the winsA and winsB counters are both zero. The practical interpretation is that the Core 9 273PQE is the only one of the two with verified performance data, and that data places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL remains unmeasured.