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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 9 273PQE and Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA present an unequal comparison in recorded performance data. The database contains a comprehensive benchmark profile for the Core 9 273PQE, while the Core Ultra 5 235TA has no recorded benchmark scores at all. This absence of data for the Ultra 5 means no direct head-to-head scores exist for these two processors.

The Core 9 273PQE delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39190 and a single-core score of 5532. Its Cinebench R20 results show 16459 multi-core and 2323 single-core. In Cinebench R15, the processor records 3950 multi-core and 557 single-core. PassMark results include 46107 for multithread, 4573 for single-thread, 164629 for integer math, 125546 for floating point math, 585752 for data compression, and 29636 for data encryption. The extended instructions test yields 38743, while random string sorting reaches 53167. Physics scores sit at 2754, and prime number finding records 198.

The Core Ultra 5 235TA has zero benchmarks listed in the database, giving it an average benchmark score of 0. This places the Ultra 5 in the 50th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 9 273PQE sits in the 93rd percentile. The Core 9's average benchmark score of 66099 reflects its substantial performance capabilities. Without recorded scores for the Ultra 5, any quantitative comparison between the two processors is impossible.

The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PQE provide useful context for its performance tier. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus averages 66159, which is 0.1 percent higher than the Core 9's average. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D averages 65914, placing it 0.3 percent below the Core 9. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus averages 66855, 1.1 percent higher, and the AMD EPYC 4465P averages 66925, 1.2 percent higher. These margins indicate the Core 9 273PQE operates within a tight performance cluster, closely matched by several competing desktop and workstation processors.

The Core Ultra 5 235TA has no nearest rivals listed in the database, consistent with its lack of recorded benchmark performance. This makes percentile comparisons for the Ultra 5 impossible beyond its 50th percentile placement, which reflects an average position among all CPUs based on the available data structure.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their underlying design. The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 9 generation. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 5 235TA uses the Arrow Lake-S codename with the Arrow Lake architecture, belonging to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. TSMC manufactures this chip on a 3 nm process node, and it contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 5 235TA has 14 cores but only 14 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading. This configuration gives the Core 9 more logical processors despite fewer physical cores.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 9 273PQE uses 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 235TA uses 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, while the Core 9 has a larger shared L3 pool.

Clock speeds show a clear performance-oriented design in the Core 9. The Core 9 273PQE has a 3.40 GHz base clock and a 5.90 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 5 235TA operates at a 2.20 GHz base clock and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The Core 9 runs substantially faster at both fixed and maximum frequencies.

Power characteristics differ by a wide margin. The Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 235TA has a TDP of 65 watts. This nearly two-fold difference reflects distinct design targets, with the Core 9 prioritizing performance and the Ultra 5 prioritizing efficiency.

Socket compatibility separates the two entirely. The Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 235TA uses Intel Socket 1851. These are incompatible platforms requiring different motherboards.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Core 9 273PQE includes UHD Graphics 770. The Core Ultra 5 235TA includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. The memory support shows the Core 9 accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Core 9 achieves 89.6 GB/s bandwidth compared to the Ultra 5's 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory support exists on the Core 9 but not on the Ultra 5.

PCIe configurations differ as well. The Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 5 235TA provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 5 offers more PCIe lanes for expansion.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins in every measured benchmark category because it is the only processor with recorded performance data. Its high boost clock of 5.90 GHz and 24 threads provide a strong foundation for multi-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39190 demonstrates substantial rendering capability. The PassMark multithread score of 46107 reinforces this position. Data compression at 585752 and integer math at 164629 indicate strong general computing throughput. Floating point math at 125546 shows solid numerical processing. The 93rd percentile placement confirms the Core 9 operates well above the median CPU.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA has no recorded benchmark wins because the database contains no scores for it. Its 50th percentile placement suggests an average position, but without actual measurements, no specific workload advantages can be confirmed. The Ultra 5's 14 cores with 14 threads provide a different thread topology than the Core 9's 12 cores with 24 threads. Its larger per-core L1 cache of 192 KB and L2 cache of 3 MB could benefit workloads with high per-thread cache locality, but no data supports this claim. The higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and additional PCIe lanes give the Ultra 5 theoretical advantages in memory-intensive or expansion-heavy scenarios.

The efficiency profile of the Ultra 5, with its 65 watt TDP versus the Core 9's 125 watt TDP, suggests lower operating power requirements. The 3 nm TSMC process node versus the 10 nm Intel node indicates a more advanced manufacturing technology. These architectural differences point to the Ultra 5 being designed for a different balance of performance and power, but the database offers no benchmark evidence to quantify any resulting wins.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show these key differences between the Intel Core 9 273PQE and Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA:

• Cores: 12 (Core 9) versus 14 (Ultra 5)
• Threads: 24 (Core 9) versus 14 (Ultra 5)
• Base clock: 3.40 GHz (Core 9) versus 2.20 GHz (Ultra 5)
• Boost clock: 5.90 GHz (Core 9) versus 5.00 GHz (Ultra 5)
• TDP: 125 watts (Core 9) versus 65 watts (Ultra 5)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 9) versus Intel Socket 1851 (Ultra 5)
• Codename: Bartlett Lake (Core 9) versus Arrow Lake-S (Ultra 5)
• Process node: 10 nm (Core 9) versus 3 nm (Ultra 5)
• Foundry: Intel (Core 9) versus TSMC (Ultra 5)
• Transistors: Not listed (Core 9) versus 17,800 million (Ultra 5)
• Die size: Not listed (Core 9) versus 243 mm² (Ultra 5)
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core (Core 9) versus 192 KB per core (Ultra 5)
• L2 cache: 2 MB per core (Core 9) versus 3 MB per core (Ultra 5)
• L3 cache: 36 MB shared (Core 9) versus 24 MB shared (Ultra 5)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 9) versus DDR5 (Ultra 5)
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (Core 9) versus 102.4 GB/s (Ultra 5)
• ECC memory: Supported (Core 9) versus not supported (Ultra 5)
• PCIe lanes: 16 Gen 5 (Core 9) versus 20 Gen 5 (Ultra 5)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 (Core 9) versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU (Ultra 5)
• Release date: 2026-03-08 (Core 9) versus 2025-07-28 (Ultra 5)
• Launch MSRP: $589 (Core 9) versus $269 (Ultra 5)
• Part number: SA4Q9 (Core 9) versus SRWPP (Ultra 5)

The Core 9 offers double the threads, higher clocks, faster boost, and ECC support. The Ultra 5 offers more physical cores, larger per-core caches, higher memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and a smaller manufacturing process.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 24 threads from 12 cores. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA has 14 threads from 14 cores.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA has a TDP of 65 watts.

Q: Do these processors use the same motherboard socket?

A: No. The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA uses Intel Socket 1851.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

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

Q: How do their benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has extensive recorded benchmarks, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39190 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4573. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: What process nodes do these processors use?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235TA uses a 3 nm process at TSMC.