Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a dominant performance profile for the Intel Core 9 273PQE, winning all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 39190 against 10301 for the Core Ultra 7 258V, a 280.4% advantage. That gap reflects the massive difference in parallel throughput capability between the two designs.

PassMark integer math follows a similar pattern, with the Core 9 273PQE scoring 164629 versus 42889, a 283.8% lead. Data compression shows 585752 against 176686, a 231.5% delta. These workloads scale strongly with core count and thread count, and the Core 9 273PQE's 12 cores and 24 threads overwhelm the Ultra 7 258V's 8 cores and 8 threads.

The single-thread comparisons narrow considerably, though the Core 9 273PQE still holds a clear edge. In PassMark single-thread, the scores are 4573 and 4018, a 13.8% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 5532 versus 1872, a 195.5% lead. The R15 single-core test shows 557 against 285, a 95.4% delta. Even where the gap is smallest, the Core 9 273PQE remains ahead by a meaningful margin.

The closest overall result is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 198 and the Ultra 7 258V scores 185, a 7% difference. This workload is less sensitive to core scaling and shows the two processors behaving more similarly, but the Core 9 273PQE still wins.

Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 16459 for the Core 9 273PQE against 6739 for the Ultra 7 258V, a 144.2% lead. R15 multi-core shows 3950 versus 1596.5, a 147.4% delta. PassMark multithread records 46107 versus 18887, a 144.1% lead. Floating point math follows with 125546 against 57372, an 118.8% advantage. Extended instructions show 38743 versus 14717, a 163.3% delta. Random string sorting lands at 53167 versus 21580, a 146.4% lead.

Data encryption records 29636 for the Core 9 273PQE against 13534 for the Ultra 7 258V, a 119% advantage. Physics simulation shows 2754 against 1565, a 76% lead. Across every measured workload, the Core 9 273PQE delivers higher scores, with the largest gaps in multi-core and integer-heavy tasks.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The Core 9 273PQE averages 66099, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Ultra 7 258V averages 20454, sitting in the 74th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PQE include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at 66159 (0.1% above), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65914 (0.3% below), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66855 (1.1% below). The Ultra 7 258V sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 at 20468 (0.1% above) and the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G at 20425 (0.1% below).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families. The Intel Core 9 273PQE belongs to the Bartlett Lake generation on the "Core 9" naming scheme, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 with the Lunar Lake architecture. Bartlett Lake is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. Lunar Lake uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. The process node difference is substantial, with the Ultra 7 258V using a much finer manufacturing technology.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 9 273PQE provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Ultra 7 258V provides 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 9 273PQE uses simultaneous multithreading, the Ultra 7 258V does not. Clock speeds also differ, with the Core 9 273PQE running a 3.40 GHz base and 5.90 GHz boost, while the Ultra 7 258V runs a 2.20 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost.

Cache organization differs as well. The Core 9 273PQE uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 258V uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The per-core L1 and L2 figures favor the Ultra 7 258V, but the shared L3 capacity heavily favors the Core 9 273PQE.

Power envelopes are in different classes. The Core 9 273PQE carries a 125 W TDP and targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700. The Ultra 7 258V carries a 17 W TDP and targets the mobile segment with an Intel BGA 2833 socket. Memory support also diverges: the Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Ultra 7 258V supports LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. Despite the lower TDP, the Ultra 7 258V records higher memory bandwidth.

PCIe lane availability differs. The Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 258V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ, with the Core 9 273PQE using UHD Graphics 770 and the Ultra 7 258V using Arc 140V.

The release dates are roughly a year and a half apart. The Ultra 7 258V launched on 2024-09-23, while the Core 9 273PQE launched on 2026-03-08. The Core 9 273PQE has a recorded launch MSRP of $589. No launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 7 258V. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins all single-thread tests. PassMark single-thread shows 4573 versus 4018, a 13.8% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 5532 versus 1872, a 195.5% advantage.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The Core 9 273PQE leads by 280.4% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 39190 against 10301. PassMark multithread shows a 144.1% lead with 46107 versus 18887.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses a 10 nm process from Intel.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V does not.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a 125 W TDP. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V has a 17 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear separation by workload class. The Intel Core 9 273PQE is a desktop processor built for heavy parallel work. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, and 5.90 GHz boost clock produce benchmark scores that place it in the 93rd percentile, with an average score of 66099. It wins every head-to-head comparison in the recorded data, with multi-core leads exceeding 280% in some tests.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is a mobile processor designed for efficiency. Its 8 cores and 8 threads run at a 17 W TDP, and its 3 nm process from TSMC allows a compact design. It sits in the 74th percentile with an average score of 20454. The single-thread gap to the Core 9 273PQE is smaller than the multi-core gap, but the Core 9 273PQE still leads by 13.8% in PassMark single-thread and 195.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core.

The nearest rivals for each processor confirm their respective positions. The Core 9 273PQE trades within 1.2% of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D. The Ultra 7 258V trades within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 and the AMD Ryzen 5 8500G. The Core 9 273PQE competes in the high-end desktop tier, while the Ultra 7 258V competes in the mid-range mobile tier.

The memory bandwidth figures add nuance. The Ultra 7 258V records 136.5 GB/s with LPDDR5X, while the Core 9 273PQE records 89.6 GB/s with DDR4 or DDR5. The Ultra 7 258V also has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches. These factors explain why the single-thread gap is not as extreme as the multi-thread gap, but they do not change the overall result.

For workloads that scale with core count, the Core 9 273PQE is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For workloads constrained by power and physical footprint, the Ultra 7 258V offers a much lower TDP with the same manufacturer.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 12 (Core 9 273PQE) versus 8 (Ultra 7 258V)
• Threads: 24 (Core 9 273PQE) versus 8 (Ultra 7 258V)
• Base clock: 3.40 GHz (Core 9 273PQE) versus 2.20 GHz (Ultra 7 258V)
• Boost clock: 5.90 GHz (Core 9 273PQE) versus 4.80 GHz (Ultra 7 258V)
• TDP: 125 W (Core 9 273PQE) versus 17 W (Ultra 7 258V)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 9 273PQE) versus Intel BGA 2833 (Ultra 7 258V)
• Codename: Bartlett Lake (Core 9 273PQE) versus Lunar Lake (Ultra 7 258V)
• Process node: 10 nm (Core 9 273PQE) versus 3 nm (Ultra 7 258V)
• Foundry: Intel (Core 9 273PQE) versus TSMC (Ultra 7 258V)
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core (Core 9 273PQE) versus 192 KB per core (Ultra 7 258V)
• L2 cache: 2 MB per core (Core 9 273PQE) versus 2.5 MB per core (Ultra 7 258V)
• L3 cache: 36 MB shared (Core 9 273PQE) versus 12 MB shared (Ultra 7 258V)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 9 273PQE) versus LPDDR5X (Ultra 7 258V)
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (Core 9 273PQE) versus 136.5 GB/s (Ultra 7 258V)
• ECC memory: Supported (Core 9 273PQE) versus not supported (Ultra 7 258V)
• PCIe lanes: Gen 5, 16 lanes (Core 9 273PQE) versus Gen 5, 4 lanes (Ultra 7 258V)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 (Core 9 273PQE) versus Arc 140V (Ultra 7 258V)
• Market segment: Desktop (Core 9 273PQE) versus Mobile (Ultra 7 258V)
• Release date: 2026-03-08 (Core 9 273PQE) versus 2024-09-23 (Ultra 7 258V)

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins in every recorded benchmark, but the magnitude varies by workload. The largest margins appear in multi-core rendering, integer math, data compression, and extended instructions. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 280.4% lead, and PassMark integer math shows a 283.8% lead. These workloads benefit from the 12-core, 24-thread configuration and the 36 MB shared L3 cache. Desktop users running heavy parallel tasks will see the largest advantage.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V does not win any recorded benchmark, but its profile suggests specific strengths. The 17 W TDP makes it suitable for mobile systems where power draw is a primary constraint. The 3 nm process from TSMC and the 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth with LPDDR5X indicate a design focused on efficiency and memory throughput rather than raw compute. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches (192 KB and 2.5 MB respectively) help narrow the single-thread gap in some tests, with PassMark single-thread showing only a 13.8% deficit.

The smallest performance gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 9 273PQE leads by just 7%. This workload does not scale as strongly with core count, so the two processors behave more similarly. The physics test shows a 76% lead for the Core 9 273PQE, and data encryption shows a 119% lead.

The percentile data reinforces the separation. The Core 9 273PQE sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 7 258V sits in the 74th percentile. Their nearest rivals occupy different performance tiers, with the Core 9 273PQE competing against high-end desktop parts like the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D and the Ultra 7 258V competing against mid-range parts like the AMD Ryzen 5 5600.

The recorded data supports a straightforward conclusion: the Core 9 273PQE is the higher-performance processor across every measured metric. The Ultra 7 258V offers a dramatically lower power envelope, a smaller process node, and higher memory bandwidth, but it does not match the Core 9 273PQE in any benchmark result.