Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a full suite of benchmark results for the Intel Core 9 273PQE, but no recorded measurements for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL. The head-to-head comparison is therefore one-sided: the Core 9 273PQE has 17 individual benchmark scores across Cinebench and Passmark suites, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has zero recorded benchmarks. This absence of data for the Ultra 5 135HL means the comparison relies entirely on the Core 9 273PQE's absolute scores and its position among other processors in the database, rather than direct side-by-side measurements.

The Core 9 273PQE posts a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39190 and a single-core score of 5532. In Cinebench R20, it records 16459 multicore and 2323 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 3950 multicore and 557 single-core. Passmark results include a multithread score of 46107, a single-thread score of 4573, integer math at 164629, floating point math at 125546, and data compression at 585752. Data encryption scores 29636, extended instructions score 38743, find prime numbers scores 198, physics scores 2754, and random string sorting scores 53167.

The Core 9 273PQE achieves an average benchmark score of 66099 across all recorded tests. Its percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database is 93, meaning it outperforms 93 percent of processors in the database. The nearest rival data shows the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66159, which is 0.1 percent higher than the Core 9 273PQE. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65914, which is 0.3 percent lower. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 66855, which is 1.1 percent higher, and the AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66925, which is 1.2 percent higher.

These delta percentages indicate the Core 9 273PQE sits in a tightly contested performance band. The difference between the Core 9 273PQE and its closest rival, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, is merely 0.1 percent, which falls within typical measurement variance. The gap to the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D is similarly small at 0.3 percent. The Core 9 273PQE trails the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by 1.1 percent and the AMD EPYC 4465P by 1.2 percent, but these margins remain narrow. The data suggests the Core 9 273PQE delivers performance comparable to high-end desktop and server processors, with no single rival establishing a dominant lead.

Where Each One Wins

Without any benchmark scores for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL, the database provides no evidence of where that processor excels. The Core 9 273PQE, by contrast, demonstrates strength across every measured workload category. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39190 indicates substantial parallel processing capability, while the single-core score of 5532 shows competitive per-thread performance. The Passmark integer math score of 164629 and floating point math score of 125546 suggest balanced arithmetic throughput. Data compression at 585752 is the highest single test score recorded for this processor, indicating particular strength in that workload.

The Core 9 273PQE's percentile ranking of 93 confirms its position among the top processors in the database. Its average benchmark score of 66099 places it within 1.2 percent of the highest-scoring nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4465P. The Core Ultra 5 135HL, with a percentile ranking of 50, sits at the median of all CPUs in the database, but this figure comes without any supporting benchmark data. The Core Ultra 5 135HL's average benchmark score is recorded as zero, which reflects the absence of test results rather than a true performance measurement.

The use-case split from the available data favors the Core 9 273PQE in every category, but this conclusion stems from the lack of recorded measurements for the Core Ultra 5 135HL, not from demonstrated superiority in direct comparison. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has a lower TDP of 45 watts compared to the Core 9 273PQE's 125 watts, which indicates different design priorities, but the database contains no performance figures to show how that lower power envelope translates into benchmark results.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Intel Core 9 273PQE is a high-performance desktop processor with a 93rd percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 66099. Its nearest rivals all score within 1.2 percent of this figure, placing it in a competitive performance tier alongside the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D and several Intel Core Ultra 5 variants. The Core 9 273PQE delivers strong results in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, with its highest relative performance appearing in data compression.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL presents a different profile. Its 50th percentile ranking indicates median performance among all CPUs in the database, but with no benchmark scores recorded, the database cannot verify this position. The Core Ultra 5 135HL uses a different socket, a different architecture, and a substantially lower TDP, which suggests it targets a different segment of the desktop market. The Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses 14 cores and 18 threads. Despite fewer cores, the Core 9 273PQE has a higher thread count, which contributes to its multithreaded performance.

For users requiring maximum processing throughput, the Core 9 273PQE has the recorded benchmark evidence to support that choice. The Core Ultra 5 135HL lacks any recorded benchmark data, so the database cannot substantiate a performance recommendation for that processor. The Core 9 273PQE also offers a higher boost clock, larger shared L3 cache, and PCIe Gen 5 support compared to the Core Ultra 5 135HL's PCIe Gen 4. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has a lower TDP, which may appeal to systems where power consumption matters, but the database provides no performance metrics to weigh against that advantage.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 9 273PQE compare to its closest rival in the database?

A: The closest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66159, which is 0.1 percent higher than the Core 9 273PQE's 66099. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 0.3 percent lower at 65914.

Q: What benchmark scores does the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL have?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero, and its nearest rivals list is empty.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL ranks in the 50th percentile.

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads, meaning it has more physical cores but fewer threads.

Q: What are the cache configurations for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename with a 10 nm process node, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL uses the Meteor Lake-PS codename with a 7 nm process node. Both processors come from Intel's foundry. The Core 9 273PQE belongs to the Core 9 generation under Bartlett Lake, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 under Meteor Lake. The Core Ultra 5 135HL is explicitly listed as using the Meteor Lake architecture, while the Core 9 273PQE's architecture field is not specified in the database.

The memory support differs between the two. The Core 9 273PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL supports DDR5 with a note that it depends on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel memory buses with identical memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory support also differs: the Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL does not.

The integrated graphics differ significantly. The Core 9 273PQE includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL includes Arc Xe-LPG 128EU. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning they do not support unlocked overclocking. The Core 9 273PQE has the part number SA4Q9, and the Core Ultra 5 135HL has the part number SRN33.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. The base clock for the Core 9 273PQE is 3.40 GHz versus 1.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The boost clock is 5.90 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE versus 4.60 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The TDP is 125 watts for the Core 9 273PQE and 45 watts for the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

The sockets differ: the Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Intel Socket 1851. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 9 273PQE and 7 nm for the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The L1 cache is 80 KB per core for the Core 9 273PQE and 112 KB per core for the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The L3 cache is 36 MB shared for the Core 9 273PQE and 18 MB shared for the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

PCIe support differs: the Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL does not. The release dates differ, with the Core 9 273PQE released later than the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The launch MSRP for the Core 9 273PQE is $589, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 135HL.