Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 9 273PQE dominates the head-to-head comparison, winning 12 of the 17 recorded benchmark tests against the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX. The largest margin of victory comes in PassMark integer math, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 164,629 against 97,177, a 69.4% advantage. This is the single biggest performance gap in the entire comparison, and it reflects a fundamental difference in how the two processors handle integer-heavy workloads.

Data compression also heavily favors the Core 9 273PQE, with a score of 585,752 versus 426,417, a 37.4% difference. The Cinebench suite shows consistent advantages for the Core 9 273PQE across all versions and workload types. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PQE scores 39,190 against 34,731, a 12.8% lead. The single-core results follow the same pattern: 5,532 versus 4,903, also a 12.8% advantage. The R15, R20, and R23 tests all show the same 12.8% delta in both single-core and multi-core configurations, indicating a uniform performance advantage across rendering workloads.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX does secure five wins, and some of them are significant. The most striking is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 235HX scores 361 against only 198, a 45.2% advantage for the mobile chip. This is a dramatic reversal of the overall trend. The Ultra 5 235HX also wins in PassMark data encryption, scoring 32,697 versus 29,636, a 9.4% lead. Floating point math goes to the Ultra 5 235HX by a narrower margin, 129,819 versus 125,546, a 3.3% difference. The PassMark single-thread test also favors the Ultra 5 235HX, with 4,683 versus 4,573, a 2.3% edge. The multithread test tells a different story, with the Core 9 273PQE winning 46,107 to 40,849, a 12.9% margin.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the clear choice for rendering, compression, and integer-heavy tasks. Its Cinebench results across R15, R20, and R23 consistently show a 12.8% advantage in both single-core and multi-core tests. The data compression score of 585,752 confirms that this processor handles archiving, file compression, and database workloads with substantial headroom over the Ultra 5 235HX. The 69.4% lead in integer math further solidifies its position for scientific computing, financial modeling, and any workload that relies heavily on integer arithmetic. The multithread score of 46,107, which is 12.9% ahead, reinforces its suitability for heavily threaded applications like video encoding and 3D rendering.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX has a more specialized set of strengths. The 45.2% advantage in find prime numbers indicates that its architecture is significantly better at prime-number generation and related number-theory computations. The data encryption win, with a 9.4% margin, suggests better cryptographic performance, which matters for secure communications and encrypted storage workloads. The floating point math advantage of 3.3% shows that this chip holds its own in scientific calculations and simulations that rely on floating point operations. The single-thread win of 2.3% in the PassMark single-thread test indicates that for lightly threaded, latency-sensitive applications, the Ultra 5 235HX can occasionally outperform the Core 9 273PQE despite its lower boost clock.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process node. It features 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The cache hierarchy consists of 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported, and the processor offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the CPU. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770, and the chip is designed for the desktop market with a TDP of 125 watts. It uses the Intel Socket 1700 and is not multiplier-unlocked.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Arrow Lake-HX variant. It is fabricated on a 3 nm process node by TSMC, a major difference in both process size and foundry. The chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It has 14 cores but only 14 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading, unlike the Core 9 273PQE which has 24 threads from 12 cores. The base clock is 2.90 GHz and the boost clock is 5.10 GHz, both lower than the Core 9 273PQE. Cache sizes are larger per core: 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2, but the shared L3 is smaller at 24 MB. The Ultra 5 235HX supports only DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, which is higher than the Core 9 273PQE. ECC memory is not supported. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the CPU, four more than the Core 9 273PQE. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU, and the chip is designed for the mobile market with a TDP of 55 watts. It uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket and is multiplier-unlocked.

The thread count difference is particularly important. The Core 9 273PQE has 24 threads from 12 cores, while the Ultra 5 235HX has 14 threads from 14 cores. This means the Core 9 273PQE relies heavily on hyper-threading to achieve its thread count, while the Ultra 5 235HX operates with one thread per core. The higher thread count of the Core 9 273PQE contributes to its multi-core Cinebench wins and its 12.9% multithread advantage, despite having two fewer physical cores.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a boost clock of 5.90 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 5 235HX has 14 cores and 14 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235HX has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 9 273PQE has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX has 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor wins the PassMark data compression test?

A: The Core 9 273PQE scores 585,752 in data compression, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX scores 426,417, giving the Core 9 273PQE a 37.4% advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX has 14 cores and 14 threads. The base clock differs, with the Core 9 273PQE at 3.40 GHz and the Core Ultra 5 235HX at 2.90 GHz. The boost clock also differs, with the Core 9 273PQE at 5.90 GHz and the Core Ultra 5 235HX at 5.10 GHz. The TDP is significantly different: 125 watts for the Core 9 273PQE versus 55 watts for the Core Ultra 5 235HX. The socket is different, with the Core 9 273PQE using Intel Socket 1700 and the Core Ultra 5 235HX using Intel BGA 2114.

The process node differs, with the Core 9 273PQE on 10 nm from Intel and the Core Ultra 5 235HX on 3 nm from TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 235HX has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 9 273PQE does not have recorded transistor or die size data. Cache sizes differ: L1 cache is 80 KB per core for the Core 9 273PQE and 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 5 235HX; L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core; L3 cache is 36 MB shared versus 24 MB shared. Memory support differs, with the Core 9 273PQE supporting DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is higher on the Core Ultra 5 235HX at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on the Core 9 273PQE but absent on the Core Ultra 5 235HX. PCIe lanes differ, with the Core 9 273PQE offering 16 lanes and the Core Ultra 5 235HX offering 20 lanes. Integrated graphics differ, with UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 9 273PQE and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU on the Core Ultra 5 235HX. The Core 9 273PQE is a desktop processor, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX is a mobile processor. The multiplier is locked on the Core 9 273PQE and unlocked on the Core Ultra 5 235HX. The launch MSRP of the Core 9 273PQE is $589, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX has no launch MSRP recorded.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly separates these two processors by workload profile and platform intent. The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the superior processor for rendering, compression, integer math, and multithreaded applications. It wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, with particularly large margins in integer math (69.4%) and data compression (37.4%). Its Cinebench results show a consistent 12.8% advantage across every version and workload type. The higher thread count of 24 versus 14, combined with a higher boost clock of 5.90 GHz versus 5.10 GHz, gives it a decisive edge in productivity and content creation tasks. The desktop platform, with a TDP of 125 watts and Intel Socket 1700, indicates that this processor is designed for sustained high-performance workloads in a desktop chassis.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX, despite being a mobile processor with a 55 watt TDP, wins in specific computational niches. Its 45.2% advantage in find prime numbers and 9.4% win in data encryption show that it has architectural strengths in number theory and cryptography. The floating point math advantage of 3.3% and the single-thread win of 2.3% indicate that it can handle certain scientific and lightly threaded tasks competitively. Its higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, larger per-core caches, and 3 nm process node from TSMC provide efficiency and memory throughput advantages. The mobile form factor, using Intel BGA 2114 and featuring 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, positions it for high-end laptops and mobile workstations.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall performance hierarchy. The Core 9 273PQE has an average benchmark score of 66,099, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 5 235HX has an average benchmark score of 52,073, placing it in the 91st percentile. The nearest rival to the Core 9 273PQE is the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, which scores 66,159, a 0.1% difference. The nearest rival to the Core Ultra 5 235HX is the AMD EPYC 8124P, which scores 52,121, also a 0.1% difference. The data confirms that the Core 9 273PQE is the higher-performing processor overall, while the Core Ultra 5 235HX delivers competitive specialized performance in a far more power-efficient mobile package. The choice between them depends on whether the user needs desktop-class multi-threaded performance or mobile efficiency with specific cryptographic and floating point strengths.