Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H wins 15 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE takes only 2. The margin of victory for the Ultra 7 is often substantial, particularly in multi-threaded and specialized workloads.

The largest single win for the Core Ultra 7 265H comes in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where it scores 335 against 142 for the Core 9 273PTE, a 57.6% advantage. This indicates a significant difference in raw integer throughput per thread. Data encryption shows a similarly wide gap, with the Ultra 7 scoring 26005 versus 14253, a 45.2% lead. Extended instructions also favor the Ultra 7 heavily, at 26805 versus 15952, a 40.5% difference. Floating point math tells the same story: 109123 versus 60673, which is 44.4% ahead.

Multi-core rendering benchmarks confirm the Ultra 7's dominance in parallel workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 2989 versus 2060, a 31.1% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 12131 versus 8586, a 29.2% margin. The PassMark multi-thread test also favors the Ultra 7, with 34027 versus 24054, a 29.3% advantage. Data compression follows with 334711 versus 258704, a 22.7% lead, and random string sorting at 40742 versus 28973, a 28.9% gap.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE, however, posts decisive wins in two specific areas. The most striking is Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 2886 against 2080 for the Ultra 7, a commanding 38.8% advantage. This is a massive single-thread lead. It also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core, though by a much narrower margin: 20445 versus 19940, just 2.5% ahead.

Single-thread performance elsewhere favors the Ultra 7. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ultra 7 scores 307 versus 290, a 5.5% lead. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 1712 versus 1212, a 29.2% margin. PassMark single-thread also goes to the Ultra 7, with 4334 versus 3433, a 20.8% difference. Integer math is close, with the Ultra 7 at 85479 and the Core 9 at 82411, a 3.6% edge. Physics simulation favors the Ultra 7 as well, 2497 versus 1917, a 23.2% lead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design approaches. The Intel Core 9 273PTE is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, under the Bartlett Lake codename. It is a desktop part with 12 cores and 24 threads, using Intel Socket 1700. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is a mobile chip from the Core Ultra Series 2, fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with the Arrow Lake-H codename. It uses Intel BGA 2049 and has 16 cores but only 16 threads, indicating a different core topology without Hyper-Threading.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The Core 9 273PTE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 265H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 has more per-core cache but less total L3. Memory support differs as well: the Core 9 supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 7 achieves a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9.

PCIe lanes also differ. The Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 7 265H provides Gen 5 with only 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are different as well: the Core 9 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 7 uses Arc Graphics 140T. Both support ECC memory. The production status for both is Active. The Core 9 273PTE has a launch MSRP of $549; the Ultra 7 265H has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is the clear winner in most multi-threaded and throughput-oriented tasks. Its 16 cores without Hyper-Threading still deliver strong parallel performance, as shown by the 31.1% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and the 29.2% lead in Cinebench R20 multi-core. For workloads like data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, floating point math, and random string sorting, the Ultra 7 is markedly faster, with leads ranging from 22.7% to 45.2%. It also wins in physics simulation and integer math, and it has a substantial 20.8% edge in PassMark single-thread performance.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE wins in Cinebench R23 single-core with a 38.8% margin, which is its standout result. It also narrowly wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a 2.5% edge. This suggests the Core 9 273PTE has an exceptionally strong single-thread capability, likely due to its 5.50 GHz boost clock. However, its 12 cores and 24 threads are not enough to overcome the Ultra 7's 16 cores in most other multi-threaded tests, even with Hyper-Threading.

For a desktop user focused on Cinebench R23 workloads, the Core 9 273PTE is competitive. For almost everything else in the benchmark suite, the Ultra 7 265H delivers higher scores. The record shows the Ultra 7 wins 15 out of 17 head-to-head comparisons, so its overall average benchmark score is substantially higher at 41621 versus 31143 for the Core 9.

Specification Differences

The table below summarizes only the fields where the two processors differ, based on recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PTE | Intel Core Ultra 7 265H |

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

| Series | null | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 12 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | null | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-H |

| Generation | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 7 (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) | 24 MB (shared) |

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

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

| 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 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | null |

| Part Number | SA4QJ | SRQAQ |

Both processors are from Intel, are Active in production status, use dual-channel memory, support ECC memory, and have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has an average benchmark score of 41621, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE scores 31143. The Ultra 7 also ranks in the 88th percentile versus all CPUs, compared to the 82nd percentile for the Core 9.

Q: Where does the Intel Core 9 273PTE beat the Ultra 7 265H?

A: The Core 9 273PTE wins two benchmarks. It leads Cinebench R23 single-core with 2886 versus 2080, a 38.8% advantage, and Cinebench R23 multi-core with 20445 versus 19940, a 2.5% edge.

Q: How much faster is the Ultra 7 265H in multi-threaded rendering?

A: In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 2989 versus 2060, a 31.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 12131 versus 8586, a 29.2% lead.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 has more cores but no Hyper-Threading.

Q: How do the process nodes compare?

A: The Core 9 273PTE uses a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Ultra 7 265H uses a 3 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which chip has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Ultra 7 265H has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core 9 273PTE has 89.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core 9 supports DDR4 and DDR5.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall winner in the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, with particularly large margins in encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, and prime number finding. Its average benchmark score of 41621 places it in the 88th percentile, and it outperforms the Core 9 273PTE in almost every multi-threaded workload recorded, despite having fewer threads. The Ultra 7 also delivers higher single-thread PassMark scores and better memory bandwidth.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE is not without merit. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2886 is exceptional, 38.8% ahead of the Ultra 7. It also edges out the Ultra 7 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. For users whose primary workload is Cinebench R23, the Core 9 273PTE is the better choice. Its 5.50 GHz boost clock and 24 threads give it a specific advantage in that renderer.

For general computing, data processing, encryption, compression, and physics simulations, the Ultra 7 265H is clearly superior. The recorded data shows it is also a mobile part with a 28 W TDP, versus the desktop Core 9's 45 W TDP, meaning it achieves these results at a lower thermal envelope. The Core 9 273PTE is a desktop-only part with a launch MSRP of $549, using an older 10 nm process. The Ultra 7 uses a 3 nm process and has a newer architecture.

The choice depends on workload. Cinebench R23 users should look at the Core 9 273PTE. Users needing broad multi-threaded performance across diverse tasks, particularly encryption and floating point, should select the Ultra 7 265H. The majority of the benchmark record favors the Ultra 7.