Intel Core 9 273PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive performance split between the Intel Core 9 273PTE and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus. Out of the 17 recorded tests, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus claims 16 victories, while the Core 9 273PTE secures a single win. The magnitude of the Ultra 9's advantage varies widely by workload, from modest single-thread gaps to overwhelming multi-thread leads.

The most lopsided result appears in the Cinebench R15 multicore test. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 5981 against the Core 9 273PTE's 2060, a deficit of 65.6 percent. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Ultra 9 posts 21198 versus 8586, again a 59.5 percent gap. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a slightly narrower but still substantial margin: 39684 versus 20445, a 48.5 percent difference. These results indicate that heavily threaded rendering workloads favor the Ultra 9 by a wide margin.

PassMark integer math delivers an exact 50 percent separation, with the Ultra 9 scoring 164839 against 82411. Floating point math widens the gap further: 201773 versus 60673, a 69.9 percent deficit. Extended instructions show 51290 versus 15952, a 68.9 percent gap. Prime number generation scores 519 versus 142, a 72.6 percent deficit, the largest relative difference among all recorded tests. Data encryption follows at 50008 versus 14253, a 71.5 percent gap, while data compression reaches 658724 versus 258704, a 60.7 percent deficit.

The passmark multithread score confirms the trend: 59439 versus 24054, a 59.5 percent gap. Physics simulation scores 3387 versus 1917, a 43.4 percent deficit. Random string sorting shows 80327 versus 28973, a 63.9 percent gap. Single-thread performance is closer but still favors the Ultra 9: 4951 versus 3433 in passmark_single_thread, a 30.7 percent lead.

The only test where the Core 9 273PTE takes the lead is Cinebench R23 singlecore. Here the 273PTE scores 2886, while the Ultra 9 scores 2356, giving the 273PTE a 22.5 percent advantage. Notably, this single victory does not carry over to other single-thread tests. Cinebench R15 singlecore shows the Ultra 9 ahead at 340 versus 290, a 14.7 percent gap. Cinebench R20 singlecore shows 2992 versus 1212, a 59.5 percent deficit for the 273PTE. The Cinebench R23 singlecore result stands as an outlier, possibly reflecting different boost behavior or thermal management during that specific workload.

Overall, the recorded data shows the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus as the dominant processor across the measured spectrum. The average benchmark score for the Ultra 9 is 79574, compared to 31143 for the Core 9 273PTE. The Ultra 9 also holds a 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 9 273PTE sits at the 82nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 9 include the Intel Core i9-14900KF with an average score of 79371 and a 0.3 percent difference, the AMD EPYC 7413 at 80041 with a negative 0.6 percent difference, the Intel Core i9-14900K at 79097 with a 0.6 percent difference, and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X at 80671 with a negative 1.4 percent difference. The Core 9 273PTE sits near the Intel Core i7-12700F at 31081 with a 0.2 percent difference, the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS at 31074 with a 0.2 percent difference, the Intel Core i7-13700TE at 31028 with a 0.4 percent difference, and the Intel Core i7-12650HX at 31290 with a negative 0.5 percent difference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus records an average benchmark score of 79574, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE records 31143. The Ultra 9 also ranks in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 82nd percentile for the Core 9.

Q: Are there any tests where the Core 9 273PTE wins?

A: Yes. The Core 9 273PTE wins the Cinebench R23 singlecore test with a score of 2886 against 2356, a 22.5 percent advantage. This is its only win across the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

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

A: The gap ranges from 48.5 percent in Cinebench R23 multicore (39684 versus 20445) to 65.6 percent in Cinebench R15 multicore (5981 versus 2060). PassMark multithread shows a 59.5 percent gap (59439 versus 24054).

Q: Does the Ultra 9 also win single-thread tests?

A: Mostly. It wins passmark_single_thread at 4951 versus 3433, a 30.7 percent lead, plus Cinebench R15 singlecore at 340 versus 290 and Cinebench R20 singlecore at 2992 versus 1212. The exception is Cinebench R23 singlecore, where the Core 9 leads.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads. Both processors share the same boost clock of 5.50 GHz.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: For the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-14900KF (0.3 percent higher score), AMD EPYC 7413 (0.6 percent lower), Intel Core i9-14900K (0.6 percent higher), and Intel Xeon w5-2565X (1.4 percent lower). For the Core 9 273PTE, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-12700F (0.2 percent lower), AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS (0.2 percent lower), Intel Core i7-13700TE (0.4 percent lower), and Intel Core i7-12650HX (0.5 percent higher).

The Verdict

The benchmark data makes the distinction clear. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the stronger processor in nearly every measured category. Its 24 cores, higher base clock of 2.70 GHz, and 3 nm process node from TSMC contribute to an average score of 79574, placing it in the 95th percentile. The 16 wins out of 17 tests include all major multi-thread workloads and most single-thread workloads. The only exception is Cinebench R23 singlecore, where the Core 9 273PTE demonstrates a 22.5 percent advantage.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE, with 12 cores, a 1.40 GHz base clock, and a 10 nm Intel process node, delivers an average score of 31143 and sits at the 82nd percentile. Its performance profile aligns with lower-tier desktop processors such as the Intel Core i7-12700F and AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS, both within 0.2 percent of its average score. For workloads that depend on Cinebench R23 singlecore performance, the Core 9 offers a measurable edge. Beyond that specific scenario, the data consistently favors the Ultra 9.

The production status for both processors is Active. The Core 9 273PTE carries a launch MSRP of $549, while the Ultra 9 has no recorded launch MSRP. The Ultra 9 uses an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Core 9 is locked. The Ultra 9 targets the mobile segment with an Intel BGA 2114 socket, while the Core 9 targets desktop with Intel Socket 1700.

Specification Differences

The Core 9 273PTE and Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus differ across nearly every core specification. The Core 9 provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Ultra 9 provides 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks diverge sharply: 1.40 GHz for the Core 9 versus 2.70 GHz for the Ultra 9. Both reach the same 5.50 GHz boost clock. Thermal design power differs, with the Core 9 rated at 45 and the Ultra 9 at 55.

Cache hierarchies show notable differences. The Core 9 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, while the Ultra 9 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. Both share 36 MB of L3 cache. Memory support differs: the Core 9 accepts DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 9 supports DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth favors the Ultra 9 at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9. Both are dual-channel and both support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Core 9 provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU-only lanes, while the Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes. Integrated graphics differ: the Core 9 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 9 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The market segment also differs, with the Core 9 listed as Desktop and the Ultra 9 as Mobile. The Core 9 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 9 uses Intel BGA 2114. The multiplier is locked on the Core 9 and unlocked on the Ultra 9.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Core 9 273PTE belongs to the Bartlett Lake family under the "Core 9 (Bartlett Lake)" generation, while the Ultra 9 290HX Plus belongs to the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh family under the "Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX)" generation. The Core 9 is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry. The Ultra 9 is built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors and a die size of 243 mm². No transistor or die size data is recorded for the Core 9.

The Core 9 lists no explicit series, while the Ultra 9 sits in the Core Ultra Series 2. The Ultra 9's codename is Arrow Lake-HX Refresh, indicating a refresh within that mobile high-performance line. The Core 9's codename is Bartlett Lake, a desktop-oriented design. The release dates also differ: the Core 9 was released on 2026-03-08, while the Ultra 9 followed on 2026-03-16.

The architectural differences extend to instruction handling and workload characteristics. The Ultra 9's larger L1 and L2 caches per core, combined with its higher transistor count and smaller process node, align with its superior performance in floating point math, encryption, compression, and multi-threaded rendering. The Core 9's L3 cache matches at 36 MB, but its lower per-core L1 and L2 capacities and older process node leave it behind in most recorded tests. The single Cinebench R23 singlecore victory for the Core 9 suggests that its architectural configuration can excel in certain single-threaded scenarios, though the broader single-thread results favor the Ultra 9.

Both processors support ECC memory and dual-channel memory buses. The Ultra 9's higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9 reflects its newer memory controller and DDR5-only support. The Core 9 retains DDR4 compatibility, which broadens its platform flexibility for desktop builds using older memory. The Ultra 9's additional four PCIe lanes (20 versus 16) provide more headroom for high-bandwidth peripherals.

The integrated graphics solutions also reflect generational shifts. The Core 9 uses UHD Graphics 730, a conventional Intel graphics solution, while the Ultra 9 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, a more recent architecture with higher execution unit count. The Ultra 9's mobile socket and unlocked multiplier position it as a high-performance mobile part, while the Core 9's desktop socket and locked multiplier target fixed-platform deployments.

The recorded data does not include series information for the Core 9, leaving its broader product family unspecified. The Ultra 9's Core Ultra Series 2 designation places it within Intel's newer naming scheme. The 17,800 million transistor count and 243 mm² die size for the Ultra 9, with no corresponding figures for the Core 9, further illustrate the generational divergence in manufacturing scale. The 3 nm TSMC process gives the Ultra 9 a density advantage that pairs with its higher core count and clock behavior.