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

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark averages?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE records an average benchmark score of 66099, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F records an average of 37313, placing it in the 85th percentile. The Core 9 leads by a substantial margin in most measured workloads.

Q: Which processor wins the majority of head-to-head tests?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The only test won by the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F is PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 352 against 198, a difference of 43.7 percent in its favor.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Core 9 therefore offers both more physical cores and simultaneous multithreading, while the Ultra 5 lacks hyper-threading support.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE boosts to 5.90 GHz, compared to 4.90 GHz for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F. The base clocks are closer, at 3.40 GHz and 3.30 GHz respectively.

Q: What memory standards does each support?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F supports DDR5 only, but its dual-channel configuration provides a higher recorded bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Do both processors include integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel Core 9 273PQE includes UHD Graphics 770. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE dominates the recorded benchmark set across rendering, encryption, compression, math workloads, and multithreaded tasks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39190 against 16467, a 138 percent advantage. The single-core gap is even larger in that test: 5532 versus 1893, a 192.2 percent lead. PassMark integer math shows a 147.9 percent advantage, with scores of 164629 and 66417. Data compression also favors the Core 9 heavily, 585752 versus 310843, an 88.4 percent difference. These results indicate the Core 9 is the stronger choice for CPU-bound productivity, content creation, and parallel compute workloads.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins exactly one recorded comparison: PassMark find prime numbers. Its score of 352 beats the Core 9's 198 by 43.7 percent. This workload is a narrow, algorithm-specific test, and it does not translate into broader performance leadership. In every other recorded metric, the Ultra 5 trails by margins ranging from 4 percent in single-thread performance to over 190 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core. The data therefore positions the Ultra 5 as the lower-power, lower-output part, with one isolated arithmetic niche where its architecture proves faster.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering, large data set manipulation, or heavy integer workloads, the Core 9 273PQE is the clear winner in every relevant measurement. For a workload specifically dominated by prime number searches, the Ultra 5 225F delivers a measurable but narrow victory. The lack of any other wins for the Ultra 5 limits its use case to that specific niche.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is built on the Bartlett Lake architecture and manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, and is manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process. The Ultra 5 also has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm²; no transistor or die size data is recorded for the Core 9.

The Core 9 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851. These are incompatible platforms. The Core 9 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, whereas the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 only. ECC memory is supported by the Core 9 but not by the Ultra 5. The Core 9 provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU; the Ultra 5 provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The Core 9 includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 has no integrated graphics.

Cache structures also differ. The Core 9 lists 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 lists 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 on the Ultra 5 reflect its newer process and architecture, but the Core 9 compensates with a larger shared L3 pool and higher core count.

The Core 9 belongs to the Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) generation and has a part number of SA4Q9. The Ultra 5 belongs to the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation and has a part number of SRQD2SRVF9. Both are desktop market segments, both are listed as active production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz and 3.30 GHz respectively. Boost clocks are 5.90 GHz and 4.90 GHz. The Core 9 has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Ultra 5 has a TDP of 65 watts.

Memory support differs: the Core 9 accepts DDR4 and DDR5, the Ultra 5 accepts DDR5 only. Recorded memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9 and 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 5. The Core 9 supports ECC memory; the Ultra 5 does not. PCIe lane counts differ, 16 lanes for the Core 9 versus 20 lanes for the Ultra 5, both Gen 5 from the CPU.

The Core 9 integrates UHD Graphics 770; the Ultra 5 has no integrated graphics. The Core 9 uses Intel Socket 1700; the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 9 is built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Ultra 5 uses TSMC's 3 nm process. The Ultra 5 has recorded transistor and die size figures, 17,800 million and 243 mm², while the Core 9 has none recorded.

L1 cache is 80 KB per core for the Core 9 and 192 KB per core for the Ultra 5. L2 cache is 2 MB per core for the Core 9 and 3 MB per core for the Ultra 5. L3 cache is 36 MB shared for the Core 9 and 20 MB shared for the Ultra 5. The Core 9's launch MSRP is $589. The Ultra 5's launch MSRP is $231.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest victory for the Intel Core 9 273PQE occurs in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 5532 against 1893, a 192.2 percent lead. This is an extraordinary gap for a single-threaded test and indicates a substantial per-core performance difference, not merely a core-count advantage. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 138 percent lead, 39190 versus 16467, which combines the effects of higher core count, thread count, and clock speed.

PassMark integer math delivers the second-largest multi-threaded gap. The Core 9 scores 164629, while the Ultra 5 scores 66417, a 147.9 percent difference. Data compression follows at 88.4 percent, with scores of 585752 and 310843. Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core both show a 48.8 percent lead for the Core 9, with scores of 16459 versus 11059 and 2323 versus 1561 respectively. Cinebench R15 multi-core is close behind at 48.5 percent, 3950 versus 2660.

PassMark multithread shows a 48.7 percent lead, 46107 versus 31004. Random string sorting shows a 42.4 percent lead, 53167 versus 37325. Extended instructions show a 38.2 percent lead, 38743 versus 28027. Floating point math shows a 35.6 percent lead, 125546 versus 92554. Data encryption shows a 30.9 percent lead, 29636 versus 22648. Physics shows a 13.3 percent lead, 2754 versus 2430. PassMark single-thread shows the smallest Core 9 advantage, 4573 versus 4397, a 4 percent lead.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins PassMark find prime numbers with 352 against 198, a 43.7 percent margin. This is the only recorded test where the Ultra 5 leads, and it stands in contrast to the otherwise consistent Core 9 dominance. The prime number test is a specialized arithmetic workload, and its result does not appear to correlate with the broader single-thread or integer results, where the Core 9 leads by 4 percent and 147.9 percent respectively.

The nearest rivals in the database contextualize both processors. The Core 9 273PQE sits near the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, which has an average score of 66159, a 0.1 percent gap, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65914, a 0.3 percent gap. The Ultra 5 225F sits near the Intel Core i9-13900HK at 37425, a 0.3 percent gap, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H at 37161, a 0.4 percent gap. These positions confirm that the Core 9 competes with high-end desktop and enthusiast parts, while the Ultra 5 sits in the mid-range segment despite its newer 3 nm process.