Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE scores 39190 versus 9848 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, a 297.9% advantage. This is the largest margin recorded across all head-to-head tests.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V competitive in any benchmark category?

A: No. Across 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Intel Core 9 273PQE wins every single one. The smallest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 9 leads by 19.3%.

Q: What is the core and thread difference between the two?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning it lacks Hyper-Threading.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 9 273PQE boosts to 5.90 GHz, while the Core Ultra 5 226V reaches 4.50 GHz. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz and 2.10 GHz respectively.

Q: Are these processors from the same manufacturing node?

A: No. The Core 9 273PQE uses Intel's 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 226V uses TSMC's 3 nm process.

Q: What is the market segment difference?

A: The Core 9 273PQE targets desktop systems with an Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 226V is a mobile part using Intel BGA 2833.

Architecture Differences

The Core 9 273PQE belongs to the Bartlett Lake generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 5 226V comes from the Core Ultra Series 2, based on Lunar Lake architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm node. This is a fundamental split: one is a desktop processor with a traditional monolithic approach, the other a mobile-focused chip designed for efficiency.

The Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores with 24 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading support. Its cache layout consists of 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and a shared 36 MB L3. The Core Ultra 5 226V uses 8 cores and 8 threads, with a different cache hierarchy: 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and only 8 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 on the Ultra 5 reflect a design optimized for power efficiency in mobile workloads.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 9 273PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 226V lists memory support as dependent on motherboard, also dual-channel, but with no ECC support and no recorded memory bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity differs sharply. The desktop part provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The mobile part provides Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 9 273PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 226V uses Arc 130V. The desktop chip has a TDP of 125 watts, while the mobile chip draws only 17 watts, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core 9 273PQE across all 17 head-to-head tests. The most dramatic result appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 9 scores 39190 versus 9848, a 297.9% delta. This aligns with the core and thread advantage: 12 cores and 24 threads versus 8 cores and 8 threads.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a similar pattern: 16459 for the Core 9 against 6381 for the Ultra 5, a 157.9% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core records 3950 versus 1501, a 163.2% advantage. Single-core results also favor the Core 9 heavily, though by smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 9 scores 5532 against 1744, a 217.2% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2323 versus 900, a 158.1% delta, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 557 versus 267, a 108.6% delta.

PassMark integer math delivers the second-largest margin: 164629 versus 38647, a 326% delta. PassMark data compression also stands out with 585752 versus 170687, a 243.2% delta. Other PassMark results show consistent but less extreme gaps: floating point math at 140.2% (125546 versus 52270), multithread at 158.3% (46107 versus 17850), and data encryption at 133.2% (29636 versus 12710).

The closest contest is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 9 scores 198 and the Ultra 5 scores 166, a 19.3% delta. PassMark single-thread also narrows the gap to 21.8% (4573 versus 3754). PassMark physics shows a 90.1% delta (2754 versus 1449), and random string sorting shows 155.5% (53167 versus 20813). Extended instructions favor the Core 9 by 163.1% (38743 versus 14724).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores with 24 threads; the Core Ultra 5 226V uses 8 cores with 8 threads. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.90 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. TDP is a major split: 125 watts for the desktop chip, 17 watts for the mobile chip.

Sockets differ completely. The Core 9 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel BGA 2833, reflecting their desktop and mobile roles respectively. Process nodes also differ: 10 nm at Intel foundry versus 3 nm at TSMC.

Cache configurations are distinct. The Core 9 has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support shows the desktop chip accepting both DDR4 and DDR5 with ECC, while the mobile chip's memory support depends on motherboard and has no ECC. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for the Core 9 at 89.6 GB/s.

PCIe lanes differ: 16 CPU lanes for the Core 9, 4 CPU lanes for the Ultra 5, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc 130V. The market segments are Desktop and Mobile respectively. Release dates differ as well: the Core 9 launched on 2026-03-08, while the Ultra 5 launched on 2024-09-23. The Core 9 has a launch MSRP of $589; the Ultra 5 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins in every recorded benchmark category. For multi-threaded productivity, the Cinebench R23 multi-core margin of 297.9% indicates a processor that handles heavy rendering, compilation, or scientific workloads with far more headroom. PassMark integer math at a 326% delta reinforces this: the Core 9 is built for sustained computational throughput.

For single-thread performance, the Core 9 also leads, though the margins are smaller. PassMark single-thread shows only a 21.8% advantage, and find prime numbers shows 19.3%. This suggests that in lightly threaded tasks, the Ultra 5's 3 nm process and higher per-core cache partially compensate for its lower clocks.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has no benchmark wins, but its specification profile indicates a different purpose. The 17 watt TDP, mobile socket, and TSMC 3 nm process point to a processor designed for battery-operated devices where power draw matters more than peak performance. Its 8 MB shared L3 and 2.5 MB L2 per core suggest efficiency in memory access patterns for mobile workloads.

Geekbench scores exist only for the Ultra 5: 8598 multi-core and 1930 single-core. These are not directly comparable to the Core 9 since the desktop part lacks Geekbench entries in the database, but they provide a reference point for the mobile chip's absolute capability.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 9 273PQE dominates the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V across every measured benchmark, with margins ranging from 19.3% to 326%. The desktop processor's 12 cores, 24 threads, higher clocks, and larger shared L3 cache position it decisively for multi-threaded workloads and demanding desktop applications.

The Core Ultra 5 226V belongs to a different class entirely. Its 8 cores without hyper-threading, 17 watt TDP, and mobile BGA socket make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal limits take priority over raw performance. The 3 nm TSMC process and larger per-core cache do narrow the gap in single-threaded tests, but they cannot overcome the Core 9's fundamental advantages in core count and clock speed.

The average benchmark scores confirm the split: the Core 9 273PQE records an average of 66099 with a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 226V averages 19368 with a 73rd percentile ranking. The Core 9's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at a 0.3% delta and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at a -0.1% delta, placing it in flagship desktop territory. The Ultra 5's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS and Intel Core i5-1345U, both within 0.2% of its score, positioning it in mainstream mobile territory.

Anyone selecting between these two should base the decision on the platform, not the benchmark numbers. The Core 9 273PQE is a desktop part for users who need maximum throughput. The Core Ultra 5 226V is a mobile part for users who need adequate performance within a tight power envelope.