Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive result: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core 9 273PTE. The margin is not uniform, however, and the pattern of deltas reveals where the architectural gap is largest and where the older design comes closest.

Starting with multi-threaded rendering workloads, the Core Ultra 5 245KF posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 against 20445 for the Core 9 273PTE, a delta of -44.2% from the Core 9's perspective. The same proportional gap appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core (3693 vs 2060) and Cinebench R20 multi-core (15391 vs 8586), both also at -44.2%. This consistency across three Cinebench versions indicates a stable multi-thread performance advantage rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

Single-core results show a similar story. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 5173 versus 2886, again a -44.2% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core (521 vs 290) and Cinebench R20 single-core (2172 vs 1212) both land at -44.3% and -44.2% respectively. The near-identical percentages across single and multi-threaded Cinebench tests suggest the performance gap stems from fundamental per-core efficiency differences, not just core count.

The PassMark suite reveals where the gap widens. The largest delta appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 416 against 142, a -65.9% difference. This workload heavily stresses integer throughput and cache behavior. Extended instructions show a -57.9% delta (37912 vs 15952), while data encryption posts -57.3% (33381 vs 14253). Floating point math comes in at -53.9% (131546 vs 60673). These results indicate the Core Ultra 5 245KF has a substantial advantage in compute-heavy, instruction-diverse tasks.

The narrowest margin appears in passmark_integer_math, where the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 98854 versus 82411, a -16.6% delta. This is the only benchmark below a 27% gap. PassMark single-thread also shows a relatively smaller delta at -27.2% (4715 vs 3433). The compression workload (460123 vs 258704) sits at -43.8%, closely mirroring the Cinebench pattern.

The Core 9 273PTE does not win a single recorded benchmark in this comparison. Its average benchmark score of 31143 places it at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF averages 55093, placing it at the 91st percentile. The Core 9 273PTE's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12700F at 31081 (0.2% ahead) and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS at 31074 (0.2% ahead), showing it sits in a crowded mid-range performance band. The Core Ultra 5 245KF, by contrast, is bracketed by the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D at 54762 (0.6% behind) and the Intel Core 7 253PQE at 55919 (1.5% ahead), a significantly higher performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core rendering score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 36647 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE scores 20445. The Core Ultra 5 245KF leads by 44.2% in this workload.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 4715 versus 3433 for the Core 9 273PTE, a 27.2% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger difference: 5173 versus 2886, a 44.2% delta.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Core 9 273PTE comes close to the Core Ultra 5 245KF?

A: The closest result is in passmark_integer_math, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 82411 against 98854, a 16.6% deficit. This is the narrowest margin among all 17 recorded comparisons.

Q: What do the percentile rankings indicate about these two processors?

A: The Core 9 273PTE sits at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 31143. The Core Ultra 5 245KF ranks at the 91st percentile with an average score of 55093, placing it in a distinctly higher performance class.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Core 9 273PTE's average of 31143 is within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-13700TE (31028) and within 0.5% of the Intel Core i7-12650HX (31290). The Core Ultra 5 245KF's average of 55093 sits between the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (54762, 0.6% lower) and the Intel Core 7 253PQE (55919, 1.5% higher).

Q: Which processor shows a larger advantage in encryption and extended instruction workloads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245KF leads by 57.3% in passmark_data_encryption (33381 vs 14253) and by 57.9% in passmark_extended_instructions (37912 vs 15952). These are among the largest deltas recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 245KF wins every recorded benchmark category. Its dominance is most pronounced in compute-heavy workloads: prime number finding, extended instructions, encryption, and floating point math all show deltas exceeding 53%. These results point to a processor with superior instruction-level throughput and arithmetic capability, likely benefiting from its newer microarchitecture and fabrication process.

The Core 9 273PTE's closest relative performance appears in integer math, where it trails by only 16.6%. This suggests that for purely integer-heavy, non-floating-point tasks, the older design retains more of its competitive position. The single-thread PassMark result, a 27.2% gap, also indicates the Core 9 273PTE is less disadvantaged in lighter, latency-sensitive workloads than in sustained multi-threaded rendering.

For users prioritizing compressed data handling, the Core Ultra 5 245KF delivers 460123 in passmark_data_compression versus 258704, a 43.8% lead. Physics simulation shows a 36.1% gap (2998 vs 1917). Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive test, shows a 47.5% delta (55206 vs 28973), indicating the Core Ultra 5 245KF also handles memory-bound sorting tasks substantially better.

The Core 9 273PTE remains competitive only in the sense that it occupies a lower performance tier. Its 82nd percentile ranking and average score of 31143 place it alongside the Intel Core i7-12700F and AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF's 91st percentile and 55093 average align it with the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and Intel Core i9-14900HX. Any workload where the Core 9 273PTE appears adequate is one where the Core Ultra 5 245KF is simply faster, often by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Core 9 273PTE relies on Hyper-Threading to reach 24 threads from 12 cores, whereas the Core Ultra 5 245KF does not use simultaneous multi-threading, pairing each core with a single thread.

Clock speeds diverge significantly. The Core 9 273PTE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 245KF runs at a much higher base frequency, while the Core 9 273PTE has a slightly higher peak boost.

Thermal design power differs by a wide margin: the Core 9 273PTE is rated at 45 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF is rated at 125 W TDP. The Core 9 273PTE's lower TDP indicates a power-efficient design, though this comes with the substantial performance penalty visible in the benchmarks.

Sockets are incompatible: the Core 9 273PTE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF uses Intel Socket 1851. Memory support also differs: the Core 9 273PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Core Ultra 5 245KF achieves 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9 273PTE.

ECC memory support is present on the Core 9 273PTE but absent on the Core Ultra 5 245KF. PCIe lane counts differ as well: the Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 245KF provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The Core 9 273PTE includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), whereas the Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics (N/A).

The Core Ultra 5 245KF has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 9 273PTE does not. Release dates are distinct: the Core 9 273PTE launched on 2026-03-08, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF launched earlier on 2024-10-23. Both carry a launch MSRP: $549 for the Core 9 273PTE, and $294 for the Core Ultra 5 245KF.

Architecture Differences

The Core 9 273PTE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, belonging to the Core 9 generation. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, under the Core Ultra Series 2 branding. This generation difference is central to the performance gap.

Fabrication processes differ fundamentally. The Core 9 273PTE uses a 10 nm process node manufactured by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 245KF also reports 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 9 273PTE's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The move to a smaller, more advanced process node is consistent with the Core Ultra 5 245KF's higher efficiency per clock and superior benchmark results.

Cache configurations diverge markedly. The Core 9 273PTE has 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 245KF has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, while the Core 9 273PTE has a larger shared L3 pool. The larger per-core caches likely contribute to the Core Ultra 5 245KF's strong single-thread and latency-sensitive benchmark results.

The Core 9 273PTE's 12 cores and 24 threads rely on symmetric multi-threading to increase throughput. The Core Ultra 5 245KF's 14 cores and 14 threads represent a different design philosophy, favoring more physical cores without SMT. Despite having fewer threads, the Core Ultra 5 245KF outperforms the Core 9 273PTE in every multi-threaded benchmark, indicating that its per-core performance advantage more than compensates for the absence of Hyper-Threading.

The Core 9 273PTE's 45 W TDP combined with a 10 nm Intel process suggests a design aimed at lower power envelopes, possibly for compact systems. The Core Ultra 5 245KF's 125 W TDP and TSMC 3 nm process indicate a higher-performance desktop part. The benchmark data confirms that this architectural direction yields substantially higher scores across all recorded workloads.

Both processors are marked as Active in production status and target the Desktop market segment. The Core 9 273PTE's part number is SA4QJ, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF's is SRQCY. The Core 9 273PTE's memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s trails the Core Ultra 5 245KF's 102.4 GB/s, likely influenced by the older memory controller and process technology. The PCIe lane difference (16 versus 20) also favors the Core Ultra 5 245KF for expansion-heavy configurations.