Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ between the Intel Core 9 273PTE and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL?

A: The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. The Core 9 has fewer physical cores but more threads due to its higher thread-per-core ratio.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock, and what is the difference?

A: The Core 9 273PTE boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL boosts to 4.50 GHz. This gives the Core 9 a 1.00 GHz advantage in maximum single-thread frequency.

Q: What are the L3 cache capacities of these two processors?

A: The Core 9 273PTE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 offers double the L3 capacity.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: The Core 9 273PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Core Ultra 5 125HL supports DDR5, with the specification noting that support depends on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel memory buses with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What integrated graphics do each of these processors include?

A: The Core 9 273PTE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL includes Arc Xe-LPG 112EU.

Q: What is the production status and release date for each?

A: Both processors are listed as Active in production. The Core 9 273PTE has a release date of 2026-03-08, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL was released on 2024-04-07.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct architectural generations from Intel. The Core 9 273PTE is based on the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture with the Meteor Lake-PS codename. This architectural divergence is reflected in several fundamental specifications.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The Core 9 273PTE is fabricated on a 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses a 7 nm process node. Both are produced by Intel's foundry operations, but the smaller process node of the Core Ultra 5 suggests a more advanced manufacturing technique.

The socket interfaces are incompatible. The Core 9 273PTE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL uses Intel Socket 1851. This means the two processors cannot be used interchangeably on the same motherboard.

Threading architecture shows a notable difference. The Core 9 273PTE delivers 24 threads from 12 cores, indicating a 2:1 thread-to-core ratio across all cores. The Core Ultra 5 125HL delivers 18 threads from 14 cores, indicating that not all cores support simultaneous multithreading, likely reflecting a hybrid core arrangement with some efficiency cores lacking hyper-threading.

Cache hierarchy also differs. The Core 9 273PTE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 125HL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 capacity difference is substantial, with the Core 9 offering twice the shared cache.

PCIe capabilities differ between the two. The Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 connectivity with 16 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. This represents a significant difference in both generation and lane count for expansion and peripheral connectivity.

ECC memory support is another differentiator. The Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL does not. The Core 9 also supports DDR4 in addition to DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5's memory support is DDR5 only, with a caveat that it depends on the motherboard.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 9 273PTE has a comprehensive set of benchmark results recorded in the database, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has no recorded benchmark scores. This limits direct comparison, but the available data for the Core 9 can be placed in context using its percentile ranking and nearest rivals.

The Core 9 273PTE achieves an average benchmark score of 31143 across all recorded tests. This places it at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. In comparison, the Core Ultra 5 125HL sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of 0, indicating no recorded performance data.

Looking at the Core 9's nearest rivals provides context for its performance level. The Intel Core i7-12700F has an average score of 31081, which is 0.2% lower than the Core 9. The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS scores 31074, also 0.2% lower. The Intel Core i7-13700TE scores 31028, 0.4% lower. On the other side, the Intel Core i7-12650HX scores 31290, which is 0.5% higher than the Core 9. These tight margins indicate the Core 9 sits in a competitive performance band.

The Core 9's individual benchmark results show its strengths across different workloads. In Cinebench R23, it scores 20445 in multicore and 2886 in singlecore. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 8586 multicore and 1212 singlecore. Cinebench R15 results show 2060 multicore and 290 singlecore.

PassMark results for the Core 9 cover a range of specific workloads. The multithread score is 24054, while single-thread performance is 3433. Integer math scores 82411, floating-point math scores 60673, and extended instructions score 15952. Data compression scores 258704, data encryption scores 14253, and random string sorting scores 28973. Physics performance scores 1917, and prime number finding scores 142.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL's lack of benchmark data means no head-to-head wins can be recorded for either processor. The database shows zero wins for both processors in direct comparison, which reflects the absence of comparable measurement data rather than a performance verdict.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the Intel Core 9 273PTE and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125HL:

• Cores: 12 (Core 9) vs 14 (Core Ultra 5)
• Threads: 24 (Core 9) vs 18 (Core Ultra 5)
• Base clock: 1.40 GHz (Core 9) vs 1.20 GHz (Core Ultra 5)
• Boost clock: 5.50 GHz (Core 9) vs 4.50 GHz (Core Ultra 5)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 9) vs Intel Socket 1851 (Core Ultra 5)
• Codename: Bartlett Lake (Core 9) vs Meteor Lake-PS (Core Ultra 5)
• Process node: 10 nm (Core 9) vs 7 nm (Core Ultra 5)
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core (Core 9) vs 112 KB per core (Core Ultra 5)
• L3 cache: 36 MB shared (Core 9) vs 18 MB shared (Core Ultra 5)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 9) vs DDR5 depends on motherboard (Core Ultra 5)
• ECC memory: True (Core 9) vs False (Core Ultra 5)
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 lanes (Core 9) vs Gen 4, 8 lanes (Core Ultra 5)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 (Core 9) vs Arc Xe-LPG 112EU (Core Ultra 5)
• Release date: 2026-03-08 (Core 9) vs 2024-04-07 (Core Ultra 5)
• Launch MSRP: $549 (Core 9) vs $325 (Core Ultra 5)
• Part number: SA4QJ (Core 9) vs SRN9D (Core Ultra 5)

Specifications that are the same include the 45 W TDP, dual-channel memory bus, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, 2 MB L2 cache per core, desktop market segment, active production status, and the multiplier being locked on both processors.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Core 9 273PTE in terms of recorded performance. It has an average benchmark score of 31143 and sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 125HL has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile. The Core 9's nearest rivals cluster within 0.5% of its average score, confirming it delivers competitive performance in its segment.

The Core 9 273PTE offers advantages in several key areas. Its 5.50 GHz boost clock exceeds the Core Ultra 5's 4.50 GHz by a full 1.00 GHz, which should benefit single-threaded workloads. The 36 MB of L3 cache doubles the 18 MB found in the Core Ultra 5, potentially improving performance in cache-sensitive applications. The Core 9 also provides more threads (24 vs 18), Gen 5 PCIe with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes, ECC memory support, and compatibility with both DDR4 and DDR5 memory.

The Core Ultra 5 125HL has its own advantages. It uses a smaller 7 nm process node compared to the 10 nm node of the Core 9. It has more physical cores (14 vs 12) and a larger L1 cache per core (112 KB vs 80 KB). Its integrated Arc Xe-LPG 112EU graphics are likely more capable than the UHD Graphics 730 in the Core 9, though no benchmark data confirms this.

The Core Ultra 5 also uses a newer socket (1851 vs 1700), which may offer a different platform feature set. Its launch MSRP of $325 is lower than the Core 9's $549, though pricing analysis is outside the scope of this performance review.

For users prioritizing measured performance, the Core 9 273PTE is the clear choice based on the database records. It has extensive benchmark coverage showing strong results across Cinebench and PassMark workloads, and its percentile ranking places it well above the Core Ultra 5. The Core 9's higher boost clock, larger L3 cache, greater thread count, and more advanced PCIe support make it the more capable processor on paper and in recorded measurements.

For users who require the specific features of the Core Ultra 5, such as the smaller process node, higher core count, newer socket, or the Arc Xe-LPG integrated graphics, that processor remains a viable option. However, without any benchmark data recorded for the Core Ultra 5, its performance characteristics cannot be verified against the Core 9. The data as recorded supports the Core 9 273PTE as the higher-performance processor in this comparison.