Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus: the data records 15 benchmark wins for the Ultra 7 against 2 for the Core 9, yet the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The Core 9 posts an average score of 66099 against 61834 for the Ultra 7, a gap that reflects the Core 9's dominance in a few heavily weighted workloads rather than overall consistency.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the broad-spectrum performer. Its 15 wins span the entire Cinebench suite, all single-threaded PassMark tests, and most multithreaded workloads. The Core Ultra 7 wins every Cinebench test by a uniform 6.5%, including both R23 multicore (41913 vs 39190) and R23 singlecore (5917 vs 5532). It also wins PassMark multithread (48270 vs 46107), floating point math (163567 vs 125546), physics (3843 vs 2754), random string sorting (60020 vs 53167), data encryption (37813 vs 29636), extended instructions (39283 vs 38743), and find prime numbers (482 vs 198).

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins exactly two tests, but they are decisive. It beats the Ultra 7 in data compression by 18.8% (585752 vs 493179) and in integer math by 34.4% (164629 vs 122449). These two wins are substantial enough to lift its average benchmark score above the Ultra 7's despite losing 15 other tests. The data suggests the Core 9 is specialized for integer-heavy and compression-driven tasks, while the Ultra 7 delivers more balanced performance across rendering, encryption, and general compute.

The single-thread results slightly favor the Ultra 7: 4764 vs 4573 in PassMark single thread, a 4% margin. The Core 9's boost clock is higher on paper, but the measured single-core scores do not reflect that advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different Intel designs. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh architecture on TSMC's 3 nm node. The transistor count for the Ultra 7 is recorded at 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die; no transistor or die size data is recorded for the Core 9.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The Core 9 has 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading. The Ultra 7 has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning it runs one thread per core. Despite having fewer threads, the Ultra 7 wins most multithreaded benchmarks, pointing to higher per-core efficiency from the 3 nm process.

Cache hierarchies differ in size and distribution. The Core 9 provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 has more L1 and L2 per core but less total L3.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 9 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Ultra 7 supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with higher bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s and no ECC. PCIe connectivity favors the Ultra 7 with 20 Gen 5 lanes versus 16 Gen 5 lanes for the Core 9.

The Core 9 is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with a 125 W TDP and a locked multiplier. The Ultra 7 is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114 with a 55 W TDP and an unlocked multiplier. The Core 9 integrates UHD Graphics 770; the Ultra 7 integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core 9 lists a launch MSRP of $589; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 7.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the 34.4% margin in integer math. The Core 9 scores 164629 against 122449 for the Ultra 7, the largest delta in either direction. Data compression shows an 18.8% advantage for the Core 9 (585752 vs 493179). These are the workloads where the Core 9's architecture clearly outperforms.

The Ultra 7's largest win is find prime numbers at 58.9% (482 vs 198). Floating point math follows at 23.2% (163567 vs 125546), and data encryption at 21.6% (37813 vs 29636). Physics shows a 28.3% gap (3843 vs 2754). Random string sorting is 11.4% faster (60020 vs 53167).

The Cinebench results are uniform across all six tests: every single-core and multi-core variant shows exactly 6.5% in favor of the Ultra 7. The R23 multicore scores are 41913 for the Ultra 7 and 39190 for the Core 9. The R23 singlecore scores are 5917 and 5532 respectively. The same 6.5% delta appears in R15 and R20, both single and multi.

PassMark multithread shows a narrower 4.5% gap (48270 vs 46107). PassMark single thread shows 4% (4764 vs 4573). Extended instructions are nearly tied at 1.4% (39283 vs 38743).

The Core 9's average benchmark score of 66099 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at 66159 (0.1% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65914 (0.3% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66855 (1.1% higher), and the AMD EPYC 4465P at 66925 (1.2% higher). The Ultra 7 also sits in the 93rd percentile with an average of 61834, and its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-13900KF at 61841 (0% difference), the Intel Core i9-13900K at 61766 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i9-13900T at 61723 (0.2% lower), and the Intel Xeon 636 at 61360 (0.8% lower).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores, while the Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores. The Ultra 7 also has fewer threads (20) compared to the Core 9's 24 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Ultra 7 supports DDR5 only with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel memory.

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The Ultra 7 wins with a score of 41913 against 39190 for the Core 9, a 6.5% margin.

Q: Does the Core 9 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the Core 9 wins data compression (585752 vs 493179, 18.8% ahead) and integer math (164629 vs 122449, 34.4% ahead).

Q: Which processor has ECC memory support?

A: The Core 9 supports ECC memory. The Ultra 7 does not support ECC.

Q: What is the socket type for each processor?

A: The Core 9 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 7 uses Intel BGA 2114.

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a clear split by workload. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the better all-rounder, winning 15 of 17 recorded tests including every Cinebench benchmark, all single-thread tests, and most multithreaded workloads. Its 20 cores, 3 nm process, and higher memory bandwidth support its consistent leads. The 6.5% margin across the entire Cinebench suite and the 58.9% lead in prime number finding indicate a processor that handles rendering, encryption, and physics with measurable advantage.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the specialist. Its 34.4% win in integer math and 18.8% win in data compression are substantial, and these two workloads drive its higher average benchmark score of 66099 versus 61834. The Core 9 supports ECC memory, which the Ultra 7 does not, and it offers DDR4 compatibility alongside DDR5. Its 125 W TDP reflects a desktop design, while the Ultra 7's 55 W TDP suits a mobile platform.

For users prioritizing integer-heavy computation, compression, or ECC memory, the Core 9 273PQE delivers the strongest recorded results. For everything else, including all Cinebench workloads, floating point math, encryption, physics, and single-thread performance, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the faster processor. The data shows a clear trade-off: broad efficiency from the Ultra 7 versus targeted strength from the Core 9.