Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between these two processors is sharply defined by workload type. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus takes the majority of the head-to-head wins, 10 out of 17 recorded tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus claims 7. The Ultra 5 dominates in multi-threaded throughput and data-intensive tasks, while the Ultra 7 shows its strength in specific single-threaded and physics-based workloads.

The Ultra 5 250K Plus wins decisively in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests, with scores of 4640 versus 4224 and 18442 versus 17603 respectively. It also leads in PassMark data compression (568721 vs 493179), data encryption (42144 vs 37813), extended instructions (44565 vs 39283), and random string sorting (69090 vs 60020). These are workloads that scale with parallel execution and memory bandwidth, areas where the desktop part clearly holds an edge.

The Ultra 7 270HX Plus counters with a massive win in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 41913 versus 30867, a 26.4% advantage. It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by a wide margin (596 vs 328, a 45% gap) and Cinebench R23 single-core (5917 vs 2261, a 61.8% gap). PassMark physics (3843 vs 3494) and floating point math (163567 vs 162692) also favor the Ultra 7, though by smaller margins.

The overall average benchmark score favors the Ultra 5, at 66855 versus 61834. The Ultra 5 also sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, matching the Ultra 7's percentile ranking. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 5 include the AMD EPYC 4465P (average score 66925, delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX (67469, delta -0.9%). The Ultra 7's closest competitor is the Intel Core i9-13900KF with an identical average score of 61841.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Core Ultra Series 2 family, but they target different market segments and use different physical designs. The Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114. Both are built on a 3 nm process node by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die size.

The core counts differ: the Ultra 5 has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the Ultra 7 has 20 cores and 20 threads. Neither uses simultaneous multithreading, so threads equal cores. Cache configurations are identical in structure, with 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The codenames differ, with the Ultra 5 using Arrow Lake Refresh and the Ultra 7 using Arrow Lake-HX Refresh.

Clock speeds show a significant divergence. The Ultra 5 has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost of 5.30 GHz. The Ultra 7 has a much lower base clock of 2.40 GHz but matches the 5.30 GHz boost. The thermal design power differs greatly: the Ultra 5 draws 125 watts, while the Ultra 7 is rated at 55 watts. This explains why the desktop part can maintain higher sustained multi-core performance despite having fewer cores.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, with dual-channel buses. The Ultra 5 has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the Ultra 7 is lower at 102.4 GB/s. The Ultra 5 supports ECC memory, the Ultra 7 does not. Both use PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are identical: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Both have unlocked multipliers, though the Ultra 7's mobile socket limits practical overclocking.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for both CPUs?

A: Both processors boost to 5.30 GHz. The Ultra 5 has a base clock of 4.20 GHz, while the Ultra 7 has a base clock of 2.40 GHz.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average benchmark score of 66855, compared to 61834 for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus does not.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The Ultra 5 is rated at 125 watts, while the Ultra 7 is rated at 55 watts. The Ultra 5 consumes more power, which aligns with its desktop market segment.

Q: Are the integrated graphics the same?

A: Yes, both use Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Ultra 5 has 18 cores and 18 threads versus the Ultra 7's 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are 4.20 GHz for the Ultra 5 and 2.40 GHz for the Ultra 7, though both boost to 5.30 GHz. Thermal design power is 125 watts for the Ultra 5 and 55 watts for the Ultra 7.

Sockets differ: Intel Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5, Intel BGA 2114 for the Ultra 7. Market segments are Desktop for the Ultra 5 and Mobile for the Ultra 7. Memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 5 and 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7. ECC memory support is present on the Ultra 5 but absent on the Ultra 7. Part numbers are SA4UZ for the Ultra 5 and SADST for the Ultra 7. Release dates are March 10, 2026 for the Ultra 5 and March 16, 2026 for the Ultra 7. The Ultra 5 has a launch MSRP of $199, while the Ultra 7 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 5917 against the Ultra 5's 2261, a 61.8% advantage. This is a massive gap, indicating the Ultra 7's higher single-thread efficiency despite its lower base clock. The Ultra 7 also wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 596 versus 328, a 45% lead, and Cinebench R23 multi-core with 41913 versus 30867, a 26.4% lead.

The Ultra 5 250K Plus counters with its own strong wins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 4640 versus 4224, a 9.8% lead. In PassMark data compression, it leads by 15.3% (568721 vs 493179). Random string sorting shows a 15.1% advantage (69090 vs 60020). Extended instructions favor the Ultra 5 by 13.4% (44565 vs 39283). Data encryption shows an 11.5% lead (42144 vs 37813).

PassMark multithread favors the Ultra 5 by 6.9% (51596 vs 48270). Cinebench R20 multi-core gives the Ultra 5 a 4.8% lead (18442 vs 17603), and R20 single-core shows a 4.7% advantage (2603 vs 2485). Integer math is close, with the Ultra 5 ahead by 2.2% (125091 vs 122449). Find prime numbers is nearly tied, with the Ultra 5 ahead by 0.8% (486 vs 482).

PassMark physics favors the Ultra 7 by 9.1% (3843 vs 3494). Floating point math is very close, with the Ultra 7 ahead by 0.5% (163567 vs 162692). Single-thread PassMark scores are nearly identical, with the Ultra 7 ahead by 0.1% (4764 vs 4757).

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear division of roles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the stronger choice for multi-threaded productivity and data processing tasks. It wins 10 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all major multi-core Cinebench variants except R23, and leads in data compression, encryption, and extended instruction workloads. Its higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and higher TDP of 125 watts support sustained heavy workloads.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus excels in specific single-threaded scenarios and physics-based calculations. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5917 is over two and a half times that of the Ultra 5, and its physics score of 3843 is 9.1% higher. The lower 55 watt TDP makes it suitable for mobile environments, though its lower base clock of 2.40 GHz limits multi-core throughput in several tests.

For users prioritizing parallel compute, data encryption, or compression work, the Ultra 5 250K Plus delivers superior results in most measured metrics. For workloads dominated by single-thread performance or physics simulation, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus shows a distinct advantage. The average benchmark scores confirm the Ultra 5 as the overall faster processor, with 66855 versus 61834, but the Ultra 7's specific wins should not be overlooked for targeted applications.