Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 238V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive verdict: the Intel Core 9 273PTE wins 14 of 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 238V claims only 3. The most lopsided result appears in PassMark integer math, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 82411 versus 38889 for the Core Ultra 5 238V, a 111.9% advantage. This gap reflects the Core 9's 12 cores and 24 threads against the Ultra 5's 8 cores and 8 threads, a structural difference that dominates heavily parallel integer workloads.

Cinebench results are remarkably consistent. Across R15, R20, and R23, the Core 9 273PTE leads by exactly 30.7% in both single-core and multi-core tests. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 20445 for the Core 9 against 15645 for the Ultra 5, while R23 single-core shows 2886 versus 2208. This uniform 30.7% delta across all six Cinebench tests suggests a consistent per-thread advantage combined with the extra thread count. The Core 9's boost clock of 5.50 GHz versus 4.70 GHz on the Ultra 5 likely drives the single-core portion, while the 24 threads versus 8 threads explains the multi-core margin.

PassMark data compression favors the Core 9 273PTE even more heavily. The Core 9 scores 258704 against 176532, a 46.5% lead. Random string sorting shows a 34.2% gap (28973 versus 21585), and multithread performance lands at 24054 versus 18407, another 30.7% margin. Physics simulation shows a 24% advantage (1917 versus 1546), floating point math a 14.1% edge (60673 versus 53160), and data encryption a narrower 9% lead (14253 versus 13072). Extended instructions produce the smallest Core 9 win at 3.7% (15952 versus 15377).

The Core Ultra 5 238V takes its wins in two specific PassMark tests. Find prime numbers shows the Ultra 5 at 174 versus 142 for the Core 9, an 18.4% reversal. PassMark single-thread also goes to the Ultra 5, scoring 3890 against 3433, an 11.7% lead. Both tests appear twice in the benchmark list under slightly different names, but the direction is identical. The single-thread result is particularly notable because the Core 9 has a higher boost clock; the Ultra 5's newer 3 nm process from TSMC appears to deliver better instructions-per-clock in this specific workload.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PTE dominates all multi-threaded and most single-threaded productivity scenarios. Its 24 threads make it the clear choice for video encoding, 3D rendering, software compilation, and any workload that scales across cores. The 30.7% Cinebench multi-core margins across three generations of the test confirm sustained performance under heavy load. Data compression, which leverages both integer throughput and memory bandwidth, shows the Core 9 at a 46.5% advantage, making it the better fit for archiving, database operations, and file servers. The 111.9% integer math lead further supports workloads like scientific computing, financial modeling, and cryptographic hashing, though encryption itself shows a smaller 9% gap.

The Core Ultra 5 238V wins specifically in prime number finding and PassMark's single-thread test. Prime number search is a latency-sensitive integer workload that rewards high per-core efficiency; the Ultra 5's 174 score versus 142 indicates its Lunar Lake architecture handles this pattern more effectively despite lower clock speeds. The 11.7% single-thread PassMark win suggests the Ultra 5 is better suited for lightly threaded applications where responsiveness matters more than raw throughput, such as everyday office productivity, web browsing, or code editing. Its 17 W TDP also points to deployment in slim laptops where sustained multi-core performance is secondary to battery life and thermal management.

The overall benchmark averages reinforce this split. The Core 9 273PTE holds an average benchmark score of 31143, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12700F at 31081 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS at 31074 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-13700TE at 31028 (0.4% behind). The Core Ultra 5 238V averages 21981, good for the 75th percentile, with rivals like the Intel Core i7-11700F and AMD Ryzen 5 3600X both at parity (0% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 236V just 0.1% behind.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different Intel design philosophies. The Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel. It is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700 with a 45 W TDP and a launch MSRP of $549. The Core Ultra 5 238V belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, codename Lunar Lake, built on a 3 nm TSMC process. It is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2833 with a 17 W TDP and was released earlier, on 2024-09-23 versus 2026-03-08 for the Core 9.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 9 provides 12 cores and 24 threads, indicating hyperthreading support, while the Ultra 5 provides 8 cores and 8 threads with no hyperthreading. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 9 uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 8 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 on the Ultra 5 likely explains its single-thread PassMark win, while the Core 9's 36 MB L3 provides a much larger shared pool for multi-core coherence.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 9 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a measured bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, plus ECC memory. The Ultra 5's memory support is listed as depending on motherboard, also dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure and no ECC. PCIe lanes favor the Core 9 at Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the Ultra 5. Integrated graphics differ: the Core 9 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 5 uses Arc 130V, a more capable iGPU for mobile use. Both processors have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE averages 31143, which is 41.7% higher than the Core Ultra 5 238V's 21981. The Core 9 sits in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 sits in the 75th.

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

A: Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, the Core 9 273PTE leads by exactly 30.7% in each. PassMark multithread also shows a 30.7% gap, with the Core 9 scoring 24054 versus 18407.

Q: In which tests does the Core Ultra 5 238V outperform the Core 9 273PTE?

A: The Ultra 5 wins PassMark find prime numbers (174 versus 142, an 18.4% lead) and PassMark single-thread (3890 versus 3433, an 11.7% lead). These are the only three wins recorded, with the single-thread test appearing twice under slightly different names.

Q: What memory options does each processor support?

A: The Core 9 273PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and ECC, offering 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 238V supports dual-channel memory that depends on the motherboard, with no ECC support and no listed bandwidth figure.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 5 238V has 8 cores and 8 threads. This 3:2 core ratio and 3:1 thread ratio explains the Core 9's large multi-core advantages.

Q: What are the process nodes and foundries for each?

A: The Core 9 273PTE uses Intel's 10 nm process, fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 238V uses a 3 nm TSMC process. The Ultra 5's smaller node likely contributes to its single-thread efficiency wins despite a lower 4.70 GHz boost clock.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 9 273PTE | Intel Core Ultra 5 238V |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm (Intel) | 3 nm (TSMC) |

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

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | Depends on motherboard |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 4 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 130V |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not listed |

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 9 273PTE is the superior processor for multi-threaded desktop workloads. Its 24 threads deliver 30.7% higher Cinebench multi-core scores across all three test versions, 46.5% higher data compression throughput, and 111.9% higher integer math performance. The 36 MB L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth support sustained heavy workloads. The 82nd percentile average score, alongside near-parity rivals like the Core i7-12700F and Ryzen 9 8945HS, confirms it sits in the upper mid-range of desktop CPUs.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V is the better choice for efficiency-focused mobile deployments. Its 17 W TDP, 3 nm TSMC process, and 8-thread design prioritize battery life and thermals over raw throughput. The 11.7% PassMark single-thread win and 18.4% prime number advantage show that Lunar Lake's per-core efficiency is real. The 75th percentile average score, with rivals like the Core i7-11700F and Ryzen 5 3600X at exact parity, places it as a solid mainstream mobile processor.

For users assembling a desktop system with Socket 1700, the Core 9 273PTE offers DDR4 and DDR5 flexibility plus ECC support, a rare combination. For thin-and-light laptops on BGA 2833, the Core Ultra 5 238V provides Arc 130V graphics and Gen 5 PCIe, though with only 4 CPU lanes. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not part of the calculus. The data supports a simple rule: choose the Core 9 for compute density, choose the Ultra 5 for portability and single-thread responsiveness. The 14-to-3 win count in head-to-head benchmarks is the definitive summary.