Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Ultra 7 also has a higher boost clock at 5.30 GHz compared to 5.10 GHz on the Ultra 9.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark standing?

A: The Ultra 7 270HX Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 9 288V is in the 76th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Ultra 7 is 61834, versus 23219 for the Ultra 9.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for each chip?

A: The Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Ultra 9 288V has a TDP of 30 watts. This makes the Ultra 9 the lower-power part by 25 watts.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 9 288V supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a higher 136.5 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 30 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ultra 9 288V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Both share the same 192 KB L1 per core, but the Ultra 7 uses 3 MB L2 per core versus 2.5 MB on the Ultra 9.

Q: Do both processors use the same socket?

A: No. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114, while the Ultra 9 288V uses Intel BGA 2833. They are not socket-compatible with each other.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a one-sided contest. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Ultra 9 288V does not win a single test. The largest advantage for the Ultra 7 comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 41913 against 10178, a delta of 311.8%. That is a massive gap driven by the 12-core difference between the two chips.

The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread performance. The Ultra 7 scores 4764 against 4274 for the Ultra 9, a delta of only 11.5%. This indicates that in lightly threaded tasks, the two processors are much closer, though the Ultra 7 still leads. The Ultra 9's higher base clock of 3.30 GHz versus 2.40 GHz helps narrow that gap, but the Ultra 7's 5.30 GHz boost clock still gives it the edge.

For workloads that use many threads, such as rendering, video encoding, or scientific computation, the Ultra 7 is the clear choice. For workloads that are single-thread bound, the Ultra 7 still wins, but the advantage shrinks considerably. The Ultra 9's lower power envelope of 30 watts makes it the more efficient option for thin-and-light mobile designs, but the performance data does not show any benchmark where that efficiency translates into a victory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from the same Core Ultra Series 2 family and are both fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, while the Ultra 9 288V uses Lunar Lake. Both belong to the Ultra 7 and Ultra 9 generations respectively.

The core counts differ sharply. The Ultra 7 has 20 cores and 20 threads, which suggests a design without hyperthreading but with a large number of physical cores. The Ultra 9 has 8 cores and 8 threads, half the thread count of the Ultra 7. The L2 cache also differs, with the Ultra 7 using 3 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core on the Ultra 9. The L3 cache is 30 MB shared on the Ultra 7 versus 12 MB shared on the Ultra 9.

The memory controllers differ as well. The Ultra 7 supports DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 9 supports LPDDR5X with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 9's memory bandwidth is higher despite its smaller cache and core count, which reflects a design aimed at integrated graphics performance and power efficiency.

PCIe lane allocation also differs. The Ultra 7 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 7 is built for high-throughput expansion, while the Ultra 9 is more constrained in that regard. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the Ultra 9 uses Arc 140V. The Ultra 7 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Ultra 9 does not.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in almost every major specification. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.40 GHz versus 3.30 GHz in favor of the Ultra 9, but boost clocks are 5.30 GHz versus 5.10 GHz in favor of the Ultra 7. TDP is 55 watts for the Ultra 7 and 30 watts for the Ultra 9.

The sockets are different, BGA 2114 for the Ultra 7 and BGA 2833 for the Ultra 9. The codenames differ, Arrow Lake-HX Refresh versus Lunar Lake. The Ultra 7 has a 30 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB L2 per core, while the Ultra 9 has a 12 MB shared L3 cache and 2.5 MB L2 per core. L1 cache is identical at 192 KB per core.

Memory support differs by type, DDR5 for the Ultra 7 and LPDDR5X for the Ultra 9. Memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7 and 136.5 GB/s for the Ultra 9. PCIe capability is Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the Ultra 7 versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes on the Ultra 9. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units on the Ultra 7 and Arc 140V on the Ultra 9.

The Ultra 7 has an unlocked multiplier, the Ultra 9 does not. The release dates differ, with the Ultra 7 launching on 2026-03-16 and the Ultra 9 on 2024-09-23. The Ultra 7 has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while those figures are not recorded for the Ultra 9. Both support ECC memory, and both are listed as active production parts for the mobile market.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows the extreme multi-core gap. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 41913 against 10178 for the Ultra 9, a delta of 311.8%. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 17603 against 7069, a delta of 149%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 4224 against 1583, a delta of 166.8%. The single-core Cinebench results also favor the Ultra 7, with R23 single-core at 5917 versus 1950, a delta of 203.4%, and R20 single-core at 2485 versus 997, a delta of 149.2%. R15 single-core shows 596 versus 301.5, a delta of 97.7%.

The PassMark suite follows the same pattern. In data compression, the Ultra 7 scores 493179 against 186521, a delta of 164.4%. Data encryption shows 37813 against 14141, a delta of 167.4%. Extended instructions show 39283 against 15613, a delta of 151.6%. Prime number finding shows 482 against 195, a delta of 147.2%. Floating point math shows 163567 against 59536, a delta of 174.7%. Integer math shows 122449 against 44019, a delta of 178.2%. Multi-thread performance shows 48270 against 19810, a delta of 143.7%. Physics shows 3843 against 1637, a delta of 134.8%. Random string sorting shows 60020 against 22622, a delta of 165.3%.

The only close result in the entire dataset is PassMark single-thread, where the Ultra 7 scores 4764 and the Ultra 9 scores 4274, a delta of 11.5%. This is the same value recorded for both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries. Every other test shows a delta of at least 97.7%. The data confirms that the Ultra 7 is not just faster, it is dramatically faster across every measured workload. The Ultra 9's higher memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s does not translate into a benchmark victory anywhere.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V in all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Ultra 7's 20-core design with 30 MB of L3 cache and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes makes it the stronger processor for multi-threaded workloads, and its 5.30 GHz boost clock gives it the lead in single-threaded tests as well.

The Ultra 9 288V offers a lower 30-watt TDP, a higher 3.30 GHz base clock, and faster LPDDR5X memory at 136.5 GB/s. It also uses a different socket, BGA 2833, and carries the Lunar Lake codename. These traits point toward a power-efficient mobile design, but the performance data shows no workload where that efficiency translates into a win.

The nearest rivals in the database reinforce the positioning. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus sits alongside desktop-class parts like the Intel Core i9-13900KF, with a 0% delta in average score, and the Intel Core i9-13900K, with a 0.1% delta. The Ultra 9 288V sits near the Intel Core i9-11900F, with a -0.2% delta, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, with a -0.2% delta. The Ultra 7 competes with high-end desktop processors from a previous generation, while the Ultra 9 competes with mid-range mobile parts.

For users who need maximum CPU throughput, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the only choice between these two. For users who prioritize low power consumption and a compact platform, the Ultra 9 288V has a 30-watt TDP and integrated Arc 140V graphics, but it gives up a large amount of multi-core performance. The recorded data does not support any scenario where the Ultra 9 wins a performance comparison. The Ultra 7 takes every benchmark, and the verdict follows the numbers.