Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data positions the Intel Core 9 273PQE as the dominant performer in this comparison, winning 16 of 17 head-to-head tests. Its average benchmark score of 66099 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 36938 on average, landing in the 85th percentile. The Core 9 273PQE sits within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D and trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by 1.1%, confirming its position near the top of the desktop performance stack. The Core Ultra 5 225, by contrast, matches the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F exactly with a 0% delta and sits just 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i9-12900T. The Core 9 273PQE is the clear choice for workloads that demand maximum multi-threaded throughput, while the Core Ultra 5 225 serves as a lower-power alternative with a single notable specialty in prime-number finding. The data does not show the Core Ultra 5 225 competing on equal footing in most general compute tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct Intel design approaches. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 225 uses the Arrow Lake-S codename on a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die size. The Core 9 273PQE provides 12 cores and 24 threads, whereas the Core Ultra 5 225 provides 10 cores and 10 threads, meaning the former has both more cores and hyper-threading support. Base clocks sit at 3.40 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE versus 3.30 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 225, and boost clocks reach 5.90 GHz versus 4.90 GHz respectively. The Core 9 273PQE draws 125 W TDP, the Core Ultra 5 225 draws 65 W TDP. Socket compatibility differs: the Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, the Core Ultra 5 225 uses Intel Socket 1851. Cache hierarchies diverge substantially, with the Core 9 273PQE offering 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3, while the Core Ultra 5 225 offers 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. Memory support also separates them: the Core 9 273PQE accepts both DDR4 and DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 5 225 accepts only DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the Core 9 273PQE but not on the Core Ultra 5 225. The Core 9 273PQE integrates UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 225 integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU. PCIe connectivity favors the Core Ultra 5 225 with Gen 5 and 20 CPU lanes versus Gen 5 and 16 lanes on the Core 9 273PQE.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin appears in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 16459 against 6317 for the Core Ultra 5 225, a 160.6% advantage. The single-core variant of that test shows a nearly identical gap, 2323 versus 891, a 160.7% difference. Cinebench R23 multicore gives the Core 9 273PQE a 39190 score versus 25891, a 51.4% lead, and the single-core test shows 5532 versus 3655, also 51.4%. Cinebench R15 multicore and single-core both show 51.4% deltas, with scores of 3950 versus 2609 and 557 versus 368. PassMark integer math delivers a 151.9% advantage for the Core 9 273PQE, 164629 versus 65345. Data compression shows a 93.4% lead, 585752 versus 302811. Random string sorting favors the Core 9 273PQE by 45.3%, 53167 versus 36590. Extended instructions run 42.6% ahead, 38743 versus 27162. Floating point math scores 125546 versus 92038, a 36.4% margin. Data encryption shows a 33% difference, 29636 versus 22285. PassMark multithread gives the Core 9 273PQE a 51.4% edge, 46107 versus 30459. Physics tests show a narrower 17.6% gap, 2754 versus 2342. The closest result is PassMark single-thread, where the Core 9 273PQE leads by just 3.6%, 4573 versus 4412. The Core Ultra 5 225 claims its sole victory in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 358 versus 198, a 44.7% advantage for the Ultra part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE leads in every multi-core benchmark recorded. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 39190 versus 25891, and PassMark multithread shows 46107 versus 30459, both representing a 51.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, it wins exactly one test: PassMark find prime numbers, with a score of 358 versus 198, which is a 44.7% margin in its favor.

Q: How close is the single-thread performance between the two?

A: The gap is small. PassMark single-thread scores 4573 for the Core 9 273PQE and 4412 for the Core Ultra 5 225, a 3.6% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger 51.4% gap, 5532 versus 3655.

Q: What process node does each processor use?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses a 10 nm node from Intel's foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 uses a 3 nm node from TSMC.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 does not list ECC support in its specifications.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 uses Intel Socket 1851. They are not socket-compatible.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins across the vast majority of recorded workloads. Its 16 benchmark victories span rendering (Cinebench R15, R20, R23 in both single and multi-core), data compression with a 93.4% margin, integer math with a 151.9% margin, floating point math, encryption, extended instructions, random string sorting, multithreaded tasks, and physics simulation. The data shows this processor is suited for compute-heavy applications that scale with core count and thread count, particularly given its 12 cores, 24 threads, and higher boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE also delivers a narrow victory in single-threaded PassMark tests, suggesting it handles lightly threaded workloads adequately, though the 3.6% margin is far smaller than its multi-threaded leads.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 wins in exactly one category: prime number finding, where it scores 358 against 198. That 44.7% advantage indicates a specialized capability in this specific mathematical operation, likely stemming from its newer 3 nm architecture and larger per-core L1 cache of 192 KB. Outside that single test, the Core Ultra 5 225 trails in every other recorded benchmark. Its lower 65 W TDP and 10-core, 10-thread configuration position it as a more efficient part, but the recorded data does not show efficiency metrics beyond TDP. The Core Ultra 5 225 also provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 16, which matters for systems with multiple high-bandwidth devices, and its higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s gives it a theoretical advantage in memory-bound tasks, though no benchmark in the data set reflects that advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification category. The Core 9 273PQE offers 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 225 offers 10 cores and 10 threads. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz versus 3.30 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.90 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. TDP ratings are 125 W versus 65 W. Sockets differ, with Intel Socket 1700 on the Core 9 273PQE and Intel Socket 1851 on the Core Ultra 5 225. Process nodes are 10 nm (Intel) versus 3 nm (TSMC). L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core, L2 is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core, and L3 is 36 MB shared versus 20 MB shared. Memory support allows DDR4 and DDR5 on the Core 9 273PQE but only DDR5 on the Core Ultra 5 225, with bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. ECC support is present on the Core 9 273PQE and absent on the Core Ultra 5 225. PCIe lanes are 16 on the Core 9 273PQE and 20 on the Core Ultra 5 225, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU. Release dates are March 2026 for the Core 9 273PQE and January 2025 for the Core Ultra 5 225. Launch MSRP for the Core 9 273PQE is $589, and for the Core Ultra 5 225 it is $246. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.