Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Comparison

Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

The benchmark data splits these two desktop processors into clear roles. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, including every multithreaded workload and most single-thread tests, while the Intel Core 9 273PQE takes two decisive single-core Cinebench victories. The Ultra 9 285K also sits higher in the overall database, with a 96th percentile ranking versus the 93rd percentile for the Core 9 273PQE, and a higher average benchmark score of 83807 against 66099. The Core 9 273PQE, however, demonstrates that its higher boost clock can dominate in specific legacy single-thread scenarios, making the choice between them dependent on the exact workload mix.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the clear winner for heavily threaded and parallel workloads. Its 24 cores and 24 threads, combined with a 3.70 GHz base clock, deliver a substantial advantage in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests. It also leads in every PassMark multithreaded category, from data compression and encryption to floating point math and physics simulations. For users running rendering, video encoding, scientific computing, or any application that scales across many cores, the data consistently favors the Ultra 9 285K.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins in two specific Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core tests, where its 5.90 GHz boost clock outpaces the 5.70 GHz of the Ultra 9 285K. These wins are substantial in percentage terms, with a 55.2% lead in R15 single-core and a 132.7% lead in R23 single-core. However, the Ultra 9 285K wins the other single-thread tests, including PassMark single-thread and Cinebench R20 single-core. The Core 9 273PQE appears optimized for certain legacy single-threaded benchmarks, but the Ultra 9 285K has broader single-thread strength across the rest of the test suite.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel design generations and manufacturing approaches. The Intel Core 9 273PQE is based on Bartlett Lake, built on a 10 nm node at Intel's own foundry, and uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and includes UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is from the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm node fabricated by TSMC. It uses the newer Intel Socket 1851 and doubles the core count to 24 cores, but with only 24 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. Its cache hierarchy is larger per core: 192 KB of L1, 3 MB of L2, and the same 36 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports only DDR5 memory, dual-channel, with a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Ultra 9 285K also has more PCIe lanes, with Gen 5 and 20 lanes versus 16 lanes on the Core 9 273PQE, and its multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking. The Core 9 273PQE has a locked multiplier. Both chips carry a 125 W TDP and support ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the database is the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 5532 against 2377 for the Ultra 9 285K, a 132.7% advantage. The Cinebench R15 single-core result also goes to the Core 9 273PQE with 557 versus 359, a 55.2% lead. These are the only two tests the Core 9 273PQE wins.

Every other recorded benchmark favors the Ultra 9 285K, often by wide margins. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra 9 285K scores 6494 against 3950, a 39.2% advantage. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 24003 versus 16459, a 31.4% lead. The R23 multicore margin is smaller at 7.8%, with scores of 42522 and 39190, but still a clear win. The Ultra 9 285K also wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 3388 against 2323, a 31.4% margin, showing it is not universally slower in single-threaded tasks.

PassMark results heavily favor the Ultra 9 285K. Data compression scores 790052 versus 585752, a 25.9% lead. Data encryption is 57745 against 29636, a 48.7% advantage. Extended instructions show 62277 versus 38743, a 37.8% gap. The find prime numbers test is a 63.4% difference, with 541 versus 198. Floating point math is 224324 against 125546, a 44% lead. Integer math is closer at 4.5%, with 172379 versus 164629. The multithread score is 67260 against 46107, a 31.4% margin. Physics is 3938 versus 2754, a 30.1% gap. Random string sorting is 94927 versus 53167, a 44% difference. The PassMark single-thread test shows 5087 versus 4573, a 10.1% advantage for the Ultra 9 285K.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 9 273PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports DDR5 only.

Q: What is the manufacturing process for each chip?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE is built on a 10 nm node by Intel. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is built on a 3 nm node by TSMC.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has an unlocked multiplier?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Core 9 273PQE does not.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in core count, clock speeds, process node, foundry, socket, cache sizes, memory support, memory bandwidth, PCIe lanes, integrated graphics, multiplier lock status, release date, and part number. The Ultra 9 285K has 24 cores versus 12, a 3.70 GHz base clock versus 3.40 GHz, but a lower 5.70 GHz boost versus 5.90 GHz. The Ultra 9 285K uses a 3 nm TSMC process, while the Core 9 273PQE uses Intel's 10 nm node. The socket is Socket 1851 for the Ultra 9 285K and Socket 1700 for the Core 9 273PQE. L1 cache is 192 KB per core versus 80 KB, L2 is 3 MB per core versus 2 MB, with equal 36 MB shared L3. The Ultra 9 285K supports only DDR5, while the Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 20 versus 16, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG 64EU versus UHD Graphics 770. The Ultra 9 285K has an unlocked multiplier and a release date of 2024-10-23, while the Core 9 273PQE was released on 2026-03-08. The launch MSRP for both is $589.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for multithreaded performance: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. Its 24-core design, higher memory bandwidth, and wins in 15 of 17 benchmarks make it the stronger processor for rendering, compression, encryption, and general parallel computing. The 96th percentile ranking and average score of 83807 confirm its position above the Core 9 273PQE in the overall database.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the pick for specific legacy single-threaded Cinebench workloads, where its 5.90 GHz boost clock produces massive percentage wins. Its 93rd percentile and average score of 66099 place it lower overall, but the R15 and R23 single-core results show a unique strength. For users whose primary applications rely on those exact tests, the Core 9 273PQE delivers. For any broader workload mix, the Ultra 9 285K is the superior choice based on the recorded measurements.