Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall win for the Intel Core 9 273PTE, which takes 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The most dramatic margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 20445 against the Core Ultra 9 288V's 10178, a 100.9% advantage. That result effectively doubles the mobile chip's throughput in a heavily threaded render workload.

The gap narrows considerably in other multi-threaded tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 9 273PTE leads by 30.1% with 2060 points versus 1583. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 21.5% edge, with scores of 8586 and 7069 respectively. PassMark's multi-thread test also lands near that range, with the 273PTE ahead by 21.4% (24054 versus 19810).

Integer math produces the second-largest delta of the entire comparison. The Core 9 273PTE scores 82411 in PassMark integer math, while the Core Ultra 9 288V manages 44019, a massive 87.2% difference. Data compression follows at 38.7% (258704 versus 186521), and random string sorting comes in at 28.1% (28973 versus 22622). Physics performance favors the desktop chip by 17.1% (1917 versus 1637).

The Core 9 273PTE also wins the single-core Cinebench tests by comfortable margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 2886 against 1950, a 48% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1212 versus 997, a 21.6% difference. The only single-core Cinebench win for the Core Ultra 9 288V comes in Cinebench R15, where it posts 301.5 versus 290, a 3.8% edge.

The Core Ultra 9 288V claims four wins total. Besides that Cinebench R15 single-core result, it dominates PassMark single-thread tests with 4274 versus 3433, a 19.7% advantage. It also wins PassMark find prime numbers by a 27.2% margin (195 versus 142). The remaining head-to-head results are close: data encryption goes to the 273PTE by just 0.8% (14253 versus 14141), extended instructions by 2.2% (15952 versus 15613), and floating-point math by 1.9% (60673 versus 59536).

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture. The Core 9 273PTE sits at 31143, while the Core Ultra 9 288V averages 23219. That 34% gap in aggregate performance places the desktop part at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 76th percentile for the mobile part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on an Intel Socket 1700 platform, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 9 288V belongs to the Lunar Lake architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 2, manufactured on a 3 nm node by TSMC.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 9 273PTE provides 12 cores and 24 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no hyperthreading support. That structural difference explains much of the multi-core benchmark gap.

Cache hierarchies also differ in size and allocation. The Core 9 273PTE carries 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 36 MB L3 pool. The Core Ultra 9 288V offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The desktop chip's three times larger L3 cache likely contributes to its strong showing in data compression and integer workloads.

Clock behavior shows a tradeoff. The Core 9 273PTE has a 1.40 GHz base clock but boosts to 5.50 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 288V starts at 3.30 GHz base and reaches 5.10 GHz boost. The higher base clock of the Lunar Lake part helps its PassMark single-thread score, while the higher boost ceiling of the Bartlett Lake part aids burst workloads.

Memory support reflects their different market positions. The Core 9 273PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC capability. The Core Ultra 9 288V uses LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode, achieving 136.5 GB/s bandwidth but without ECC. The mobile chip's higher memory bandwidth does not translate into benchmark wins, likely because its lower core count limits memory-bound throughput.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 9 288V offers Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. Integrated graphics also diverge: the desktop part uses UHD Graphics 730, while the mobile part packs Arc 140V.

The release timeline shows the Core Ultra 9 288V arriving earlier, with a September 2024 launch. The Core 9 273PTE appears in March 2026. The Core 9 273PTE carries a launch MSRP of $549 and remains active in production, as does the Core Ultra 9 288V.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PTE wins in almost every scenario that stresses multiple cores or sustained throughput. Cinebench R23 multi-core at 20445 versus 10178 makes it the clear choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and batch processing. The 87.2% advantage in integer math points to strength in compilation, scientific computing, and database operations. Data compression at 258704 versus 186521 indicates file archiving and backup workloads favor the desktop chip.

The Core Ultra 9 288V demonstrates its niche in single-threaded responsiveness. PassMark single-thread at 4274 versus 3433 gives it a 19.7% edge for applications that rely on one core, such as legacy software, certain audio plugins, or lightly threaded UI interactions. Its find prime numbers win by 27.2% suggests efficient execution of tight loops with low data footprint, a pattern common in some simulation and cryptography tasks.

The Cinebench R15 single-core result, where the Core Ultra 9 288V wins by 3.8%, shows the mobile part can edge out the desktop chip in short single-core bursts. However, the Cinebench R20 and R23 single-core tests reverse that outcome, with the Core 9 273PTE leading by 21.6% and 48% respectively. This inconsistency implies the Lunar Lake chip's advantage appears only in specific, shorter-duration single-thread workloads.

For users focused on peak aggregate throughput, the Core 9 273PTE's 82nd percentile ranking versus the Core Ultra 9 288V's 76th percentile confirms the desktop part belongs in a higher performance tier. The mobile chip's 8-core, 8-thread configuration caps its ceiling in all tested multi-thread scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the biggest difference, with the Core 9 273PTE scoring 20445 versus 10178, a 100.9% advantage.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 9 288V win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins four tests: Cinebench R15 single-core (301.5 versus 290), PassMark single-thread (4274 versus 3433), PassMark find prime numbers (195 versus 142), and the duplicate PassMark single-thread entry.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Core Ultra 9 288V supports LPDDR5X with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What process nodes are used for each chip?

A: The Core 9 273PTE uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The Core Ultra 9 288V uses a 3 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 9 288V does not.

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a clear picture for workload allocation. The Intel Core 9 273PTE delivers superior performance in 13 of 17 comparisons, with particularly large margins in multi-core rendering (100.9% in Cinebench R23), integer math (87.2%), and data compression (38.7%). Its 24 threads and 36 MB L3 cache provide the resources needed for demanding parallel workloads. The 82nd percentile ranking places it above the Core Ultra 9 288V's 76th percentile.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V justifies its existence through single-thread efficiency in specific tests. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4274 versus 3433 represents a meaningful 19.7% advantage, and the find prime numbers result shows a 27.2% edge. These wins suggest scenarios where the mobile chip's architecture excels: short, single-core bursts with high clock responsiveness.

The choice depends on workload type. For multi-threaded rendering, compilation, data processing, and archiving, the Core 9 273PTE is the stronger part based on recorded scores. For single-threaded applications where the Core Ultra 9 288V's PassMark single-thread lead matters, the mobile chip holds an advantage, though its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1950 trails the 273PTE's 2886 by 48%.

The Core 9 273PTE also offers more PCIe lanes (16 versus 4), ECC support, and a larger L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 288V counters with higher memory bandwidth (136.5 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s), a smaller process node, and a lower 30 W TDP versus 45 W. The data does not support the mobile chip as a general-purpose alternative; it wins only in narrow single-thread scenarios.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 9 273PTE | Intel Core Ultra 9 288V |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 30 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Generation | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 9 (Lunar Lake) |

| 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) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 140V |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not available |

| Part Number | SA4QJ | SRPMSSRPMWQ5JTQ5JUQ5KW |