Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235H Comparison

The Intel Core 9 273PTE and Intel Core Ultra 5 235H occupy different segments of the desktop and mobile markets, respectively, yet their benchmark data reveals a decisive performance gap. The Core Ultra 5 235H wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Core 9 273PTE secures only a single victory. Despite the Core 9 273PTE's higher boost clock and larger L3 cache, the Core Ultra 5 235H consistently delivers superior scores across Cinebench and PassMark workloads, indicating a fundamental advantage in per-core efficiency and multi-threaded throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H dominates the vast majority of workloads in the database. Its victories span every Cinebench generation, from R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core tests. The scores show a uniform margin of roughly 20% across these tests, with the R15 multi-core test showing a 20.2% advantage, R15 single-core a 20.3% advantage, and R20 and R23 both showing 20.1% deltas. This consistency suggests that the Core Ultra 5 235H's architectural efficiency translates across different rendering and compute workloads.

In PassMark tests, the Core Ultra 5 235H also leads in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting. The largest margins occur in find prime numbers (40.6% ahead) and data encryption (38.4% ahead), while the smallest margin is in physics at 3.4%. These results indicate strong performance in both integer-heavy and floating-point workloads, with particular strength in cryptographic and prime-number tasks.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE wins only one test: PassMark integer math. Its score of 82411 beats the Core Ultra 5 235H's 74247, representing an 11% advantage. This single win highlights a specific strength in integer arithmetic, but it does not offset the broader pattern of losses. The Core 9 273PTE also trails in the overall average benchmark score, at 31143 versus 37522 for the Core Ultra 5 235H, which places it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs compared to the 85th percentile for the Ultra 5.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different design approaches. The Intel Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 235H uses the Arrow Lake-H codename, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. The Core 9 273PTE is a desktop part with 12 cores and 24 threads, whereas the Core Ultra 5 235H is a mobile part with 14 cores and 14 threads. The thread count difference is notable: the Core 9 273PTE uses hyper-threading, while the Core Ultra 5 235H does not, resulting in 24 threads versus 14 threads despite having fewer physical cores.

Cache configurations also differ substantially. The Core 9 273PTE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 235H provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite having half the L3 cache, the Core Ultra 5 235H still outperforms in most tests, suggesting that its smaller process node and newer architecture more than compensate for the cache reduction.

Memory support and connectivity also differ. The Core 9 273PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 5 235H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PTE offers ECC memory support, whereas the Core Ultra 5 235H does not. PCIe lanes also differ: the Core 9 273PTE provides 16 CPU lanes of Gen 5, while the Core Ultra 5 235H provides 8 CPU lanes of Gen 5. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Core 9 273PTE using UHD Graphics 730 and the Core Ultra 5 235H using Arc Graphics 140T.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a consistent 20% deficit for the Core 9 273PTE across all six tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 9 273PTE scores 2060 against 2580 for the Core Ultra 5 235H, a 20.2% difference. The single-core R15 test shows 290 versus 364, a 20.3% gap. R20 multi-core shows 8586 versus 10751, and R20 single-core shows 1212 versus 1517, both at 20.1% deltas. R23 multi-core shows 20445 versus 25598, and R23 single-core shows 2886 versus 3613, again both at 20.1% deltas. The uniformity of these margins indicates a consistent architectural advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

PassMark results show wider variance. Data compression favors the Core Ultra 5 235H by 14.3%, with scores of 301979 versus 258704. Data encryption shows a 38.4% gap, with 23121 versus 14253. Extended instructions show a 31.7% gap, with 23354 versus 15952. Find prime numbers shows the largest gap at 40.6%, with 239 versus 142. Floating point math shows a 35.1% gap, with 93509 versus 60673. Integer math is the only test the Core 9 273PTE wins, with 82411 versus 74247, an 11% margin in its favor.

The multithread test shows a 20.1% gap, with 30091 versus 24054. Physics shows a narrow 3.4% gap, with 1985 versus 1917. Random string sorting shows a 20% gap, with 36208 versus 28973. Single-thread tests show a 21.2% gap, with 4359 versus 3433. These results confirm that the Core Ultra 5 235H leads in nearly every category, with the Core 9 273PTE's integer math win being the sole exception.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 24 threads from 12 cores, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 threads from 14 cores. The Core 9 273PTE uses hyper-threading, while the Core Ultra 5 235H does not.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has an average benchmark score of 37522, compared to 31143 for the Intel Core 9 273PTE. The Core Ultra 5 235H also sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 82nd percentile for the Core 9 273PTE.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H does not.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has a TDP of 28 watts.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H for nearly all computing tasks. Its 16 wins out of 17 head-to-head tests, combined with a 20.5% higher average benchmark score, make it the stronger performer in multi-threaded rendering, single-thread responsiveness, and most PassMark workloads. The Core Ultra 5 235H achieves this despite a lower 5.00 GHz boost clock, half the L3 cache, and a lower 28-watt TDP, all of which point to the efficiency of its 3 nm TSMC process and Arrow Lake architecture.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE retains value in specific scenarios. Its 11% lead in PassMark integer math indicates a niche advantage for integer-heavy computations, and its 36 MB L3 cache, 24 threads, and ECC memory support make it a candidate for desktop systems requiring those features. Its 16 Gen 5 PCIe lanes also exceed the 8 lanes on the Core Ultra 5 235H, which could matter for expansion-heavy desktop builds.

For buyers prioritizing raw performance across Cinebench and PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 235H is the clear choice. Its margins are consistent and often large, particularly in encryption and prime-number workloads. The Core 9 273PTE, while not without merit, trails in 16 of 17 tests and offers no performance advantage except in integer math. The data suggests that the Core Ultra 5 235H's architectural efficiency overcomes its physical disadvantages, making it the superior processor in the database's recorded benchmarks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PTE | Intel Core Ultra 5 235H |

|----------------|----------------------|--------------------------|

| Cores | 12 | 14 |

| Threads | 24 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-H |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2025-01-12 |

| Part Number | SA4QJ | SRQAP |