Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is decisively the stronger processor in nearly every measured workload. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 66099 against 33537 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H. The Core 9 273PQE sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 7 255H sits at the 83rd percentile. The Core 9 273PQE is a desktop part with a 125 TDP, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is a mobile part with a 28 TDP, so the performance gap is expected, but the scale of it is notable.

The Core Ultra 7 255H is the only sensible pick for a laptop or any power-constrained system, since it uses a fraction of the power budget and still delivers competitive single-thread results. The Core 9 273PQE is the choice for desktop builders who need maximum multi-threaded throughput in Cinebench-style workloads and heavy integer math. The Core Ultra 7 255H wins exactly one benchmark, find prime numbers, by 34.7%, which points to a specific niche in prime-number computation that the Core 9 273PQE cannot match.

For buyers choosing between these two, the decision is about platform and power envelope, not raw capability. The Core 9 273PQE dominates the Core Ultra 7 255H in nearly all recorded tests, but the Core Ultra 7 255H remains viable for mobile users who prioritize the find prime numbers workload and a far lower TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins across the entire Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39190 against 9240, a 324.1% advantage. That is the single largest margin in the head-to-head data. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 3950 against 1515, a 160.7% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 16459 against 6381, a 157.9% lead. Single-core Cinebench results also favor the Core 9 273PQE: R23 single-core is 5532 against 1843, a 200.2% lead; R20 single-core is 2323 against 900, a 158.1% lead; R15 single-core is 557 against 251, a 121.9% lead.

In PassMark tests, the Core 9 273PQE leads in data compression by 96%, integer math by 111.1%, multithread by 50.2%, random string sorting by 47.4%, extended instructions by 63.1%, floating point math by 27.1%, data encryption by 26.7%, and physics by 22.2%. The single-thread PassMark score is nearly even: 4573 against 4317, a 5.9% lead for the Core 9 273PQE.

The Core Ultra 7 255H wins only PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 303 against 198, a 34.7% advantage. This is the sole workload where the mobile chip outperforms the desktop part. The Core Ultra 7 255H also has a higher memory bandwidth figure of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s, which may contribute to its prime number efficiency despite the overall performance deficit.

Architecture Differences

The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Core 9 273PQE is a desktop processor with 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is a mobile processor with 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 9 273PQE has no hyperthreading advantage in core count, but it has more threads than the Core Ultra 7 255H, which has 16 threads for 16 cores.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 9 273PQE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core 9 273PQE's larger L3 pool is likely a factor in its Cinebench dominance, while the Core Ultra 7 255H's larger per-core L1 and L2 may help its prime number result.

Memory support also differs. The Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 255H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Core Ultra 7 255H has a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. The Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses Intel BGA 2049, which is a soldered mobile socket.

The Core 9 273PQE has UHD Graphics 770 integrated, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has Arc Graphics 140T. The Core 9 273PQE has PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Both support ECC memory. The Core 9 273PQE has a launch MSRP of $589. The Core Ultra 7 255H has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE is significantly faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39190 against 9240 for the Core Ultra 7 255H, a 324.1% advantage. It also leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core by 160.7% and Cinebench R20 multi-core by 157.9%.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 255H win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 303 against 198, a 34.7% lead over the Core 9 273PQE. That is its only win in the 17 head-to-head comparisons.

Q: What is the core and thread difference?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 9 273PQE has more threads despite fewer cores, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has more physical cores but no extra threads.

Q: How do the power envelopes compare?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has a TDP of 28. This makes the Core Ultra 7 255H far more suitable for mobile systems.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 7 255H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 9 273PQE has 89.6 GB/s. Both support dual-channel memory, but the Core Ultra 7 255H supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Core 9 273PQE leads in PassMark single-thread by 5.9%, scoring 4573 against 4317. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the lead is much larger at 200.2%, with scores of 5532 against 1843.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Core 9 273PQE is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 39190 against 9240, a 324.1% advantage. This is the most lopsided result in the entire comparison. The Core 9 273PQE also dominates Cinebench R23 single-core by 200.2%, scoring 5532 against 1843. These two results show that the desktop chip is not just faster in multi-threaded rendering but also significantly faster in single-threaded rendering.

Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 160.7% lead for the Core 9 273PQE, with scores of 3950 against 1515. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 157.9% lead, with scores of 16459 against 6381. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 121.9% lead, with scores of 557 against 251. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 158.1% lead, with scores of 2323 against 900.

In PassMark data compression, the Core 9 273PQE scores 585752 against 298850, a 96% lead. In PassMark integer math, it scores 164629 against 77975, a 111.1% lead. PassMark multithread shows a 50.2% lead, with scores of 46107 against 30703. PassMark random string sorting shows a 47.4% lead, with scores of 53167 against 36058. PassMark extended instructions shows a 63.1% lead, with scores of 38743 against 23755.

PassMark floating point math shows a 27.1% lead, with scores of 125546 against 98796. PassMark data encryption shows a 26.7% lead, with scores of 29636 against 23395. PassMark physics shows a 22.2% lead, with scores of 2754 against 2254. PassMark single-thread shows a 5.9% lead, with scores of 4573 against 4317. PassMark singlethread shows the same 5.9% lead with identical scores.

The only win for the Core Ultra 7 255H is PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 303 against 198, a 34.7% advantage. This is the sole benchmark where the mobile chip outperforms the desktop chip, and it is a narrow but clear result.

Specification Differences

The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has a TDP of 28.

The Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses Intel BGA 2049. The Core 9 273PQE is based on the Bartlett Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is based on the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Core 9 273PQE is in the Core 9 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is in the Ultra 7 generation.

Cache differs: the Core 9 273PQE has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: the Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 255H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9 273PQE and 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 255H.

PCIe lanes differ: the Core 9 273PQE has Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: the Core 9 273PQE has UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has Arc Graphics 140T. The market segment differs: the Core 9 273PQE is a desktop part, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is a mobile part. The Core 9 273PQE has a release date of 2026-03-08, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has a release date of 2025-01-12. The Core 9 273PQE has a launch MSRP of $589, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has no recorded launch MSRP.