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

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX wins every single recorded test against the Intel Core 9 273PTE, 17 wins to 0. The Core Ultra 7 265HX delivers dramatically higher scores across all Cinebench and PassMark workloads, with the smallest advantage being a 23.7% lead in single-threaded performance. The largest gaps exceed 60% in several compute-heavy tasks. The Core 9 273PTE occupies the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX sits at the 93rd percentile.

For a desktop builder, the Core 9 273PTE represents a high-end Socket 1700 option with a 45 W TDP and ECC memory support, but its performance profile trails the mobile Core Ultra 7 265HX substantially. The Core Ultra 7 265HX, despite being a mobile part with a 55 W TDP, shows itself as the stronger performer in every measurable category. The average benchmark score tells the story: 31143 for the Core 9 273PTE versus 63173 for the Core Ultra 7 265HX, roughly double the aggregate output.

The Core Ultra 7 265HX is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, multithreaded throughput, or single-core responsiveness. The Core 9 273PTE remains relevant only for users who specifically need a desktop platform with ECC memory or DDR4 compatibility, as those features are absent on the Core Ultra 7 265HX. The data does not support any scenario where the Core 9 273PTE outperforms its rival.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. It pairs 12 cores with 24 threads, indicating hyper-threading support. Its socket is Intel Socket 1700, and it targets the desktop market segment. The Core Ultra 7 265HX belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake-HX codename and Arrow Lake architecture, and is fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It packs 20 cores but only 20 threads, meaning it lacks hyper-threading. Its socket is Intel BGA 2114, and it is designed for mobile systems.

Cache configurations differ notably. The Core 9 273PTE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 265HX provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The transistor count for the Core Ultra 7 265HX is recorded at 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 9 273PTE has no listed transistor or die size data. The Core Ultra 7 265HX also carries an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Core 9 273PTE is locked.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The Core 9 273PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and ECC enabled, delivering 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 265HX supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe connectivity favors the mobile part: 20 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU versus 16 Gen 5 lanes on the desktop chip. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 9 273PTE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The release dates place the Core Ultra 7 265HX earlier in January 2025, with the Core 9 273PTE following in March 2026.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 7 265HX dominates every recorded comparison. In Cinebench R15, the multicore score is 4096 versus 2060 for the Core 9 273PTE, a 49.7% deficit for the desktop part. The single-core result is 578 versus 290, also a 49.8% gap. Cinebench R20 shows the same pattern: 17069 versus 8586 in multicore (49.7% behind) and 2409 versus 1212 in single-core (49.7% behind). Cinebench R23 follows with 40642 versus 20445 in multicore (49.7% behind) and 5737 versus 2886 in single-core (49.7% behind). Every Cinebench test lands at roughly a 50% performance shortfall, indicating a consistent structural advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265HX.

PassMark results widen the gap further in several areas. Data compression scores 511817 versus 258704, a 49.5% difference. Data encryption shows 39472 versus 14253, meaning the Core 9 273PTE trails by 63.9%. Extended instructions hit 40741 versus 15952, a 60.8% deficit. Prime number finding yields 406 versus 142, a 65% gap, the largest single margin in the dataset. Floating point math records 161605 versus 60673, a 62.5% shortfall. Integer math is closer but still decisive: 126954 versus 82411, with the Core 9 273PTE behind by 35.1%. Multithreaded PassMark scores 47985 versus 24054, a 49.9% deficit. Physics tests show 2978 versus 1917, a 35.6% gap. Random string sorting produces 62458 versus 28973, a 53.6% difference. Single-thread PassMark scores 4500 versus 3433, a 23.7% deficit, the closest result in the entire comparison.

The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265HX is particularly strong in encryption, extended instructions, prime number calculations, and floating point operations, where its advantage exceeds 60%. Its smallest edge appears in single-threaded workloads and integer math, though even there it maintains a comfortable lead.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Core 9 273PTE averages 31143 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX averages 63173. The Core Ultra 7 265HX sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 82nd percentile for the Core 9 273PTE.

Q: Does the Core 9 273PTE support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory and works with both DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 7 265HX does not support ECC and only accepts DDR5.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 9 273PTE boosts to 5.50 GHz, which is higher than the Core Ultra 7 265HX's 5.30 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 7 265HX has a higher base clock at 2.60 GHz versus 1.40 GHz.

Q: What are the power ratings for each chip?

A: The Core 9 273PTE has a 45 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX has a 55 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265HX provides 20 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, compared to 16 Gen 5 lanes on the Core 9 273PTE.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 265HX wins in every benchmark category recorded, so the use-case split is defined by features rather than performance. The Core 9 273PTE is the only option for desktop users on Socket 1700 who require ECC memory support. It also offers DDR4 compatibility, which can matter for systems reusing older memory modules. Its 45 W TDP is lower than the rival's 55 W TDP, which may simplify cooling in constrained desktop builds. The locked multiplier means no overclocking, but the platform itself is a standard desktop socket.

The Core Ultra 7 265HX is the pick for any workload where compute throughput is the priority. Its 49.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore and 49.9% lead in PassMark multithread make it the stronger choice for rendering, compilation, and other parallel tasks. Its 23.7% single-thread advantage also makes it preferable for lightly threaded applications and general responsiveness. The 63.9% encryption lead and 62.5% floating point advantage point to strong suitability for cryptography, scientific computing, and numerical simulation. The 60.8% lead in extended instructions suggests better support for vectorized and specialized instruction workloads. Its unlocked multiplier allows tuning for users who want to push performance further. The Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU integrated GPU is a more capable graphics solution than the UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 9 273PTE, which matters for systems without a discrete GPU.

The Core 9 273PTE finds its niche strictly in legacy platform compatibility. For anyone building a new system without constraints on memory type or socket, the Core Ultra 7 265HX delivers superior performance across the board. The data records no benchmark where the Core 9 273PTE comes out ahead.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear separation between the two processors. The Core 9 273PTE uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX uses 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are 1.40 GHz versus 2.60 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.50 GHz versus 5.30 GHz, favoring the Core 9 273PTE on boost but the Core Ultra 7 265HX on base. TDP is 45 W for the desktop part and 55 W for the mobile part. Sockets differ: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2114. The process node is 10 nm at Intel for the Core 9 273PTE, versus 3 nm at TSMC for the Core Ultra 7 265HX. The Core Ultra 7 265HX lists 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the Core 9 273PTE has no such data.

Cache structures differ in size and layout. L1 cache is 80 KB per core on the Core 9 273PTE versus 192 KB per core on the Core Ultra 7 265HX. L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 cache is 36 MB shared on the Core 9 273PTE versus 30 MB shared on the Core Ultra 7 265HX. Memory support: DDR4 and DDR5 with ECC on the Core 9 273PTE, DDR5 only without ECC on the Core Ultra 7 265HX. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 16 Gen 5 on the Core 9 273PTE and 20 Gen 5 on the Core Ultra 7 265HX. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core Ultra 7 265HX has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 9 273PTE is locked. The Core 9 273PTE has a launch MSRP of $549, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX has no listed launch MSRP. Release dates are January 2025 for the Core Ultra 7 265HX and March 2026 for the Core 9 273PTE.