Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus vs Intel Processor 300 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts compare between the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus and the Intel Processor 300?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads. This represents a tenfold difference in core count.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock capability?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz, whereas the Intel Processor 300 has no boost clock listed in the database, operating only at a 3.90 GHz base clock.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Processor 300 uses a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry.

Q: Do both processors support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5. However, the Intel Processor 300 also supports DDR4, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports only DDR5.

Q: What is the integrated graphics difference?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the Intel Processor 300 includes UHD Graphics 710.

Q: How does the database rank these processors overall?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Processor 300 sits at the 50th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different Intel product families and design philosophies. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename. It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, packing 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. The Intel Processor 300 belongs to the Raptor Lake generation, specifically Raptor Lake-S, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 163 mm² die size and no transistor count recorded in the database.

Core organization differs substantially. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning each core handles a single thread. The Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support. Cache hierarchies also diverge sharply. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300 offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3.

Memory support differs as well. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Intel Processor 300 supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no memory bandwidth figure is listed in the database. PCIe connectivity is similar in generation but different in lane count: the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Intel Processor 300 provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Intel Processor 300 has a locked multiplier. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus targets the mobile segment with a BGA 2114 socket, whereas the Intel Processor 300 targets desktop with an LGA 1700 socket. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a 55 W TDP, and the Intel Processor 300 has a 46 W TDP. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus was released in March 2026, while the Intel Processor 300 launched in January 2024.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors, and the Intel Processor 300 has no individual benchmark scores listed. However, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a full set of Cinebench and PassMark measurements, allowing analysis of its performance profile against the broader CPU landscape.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 41,913 points, with a single-core score of 5,917. Cinebench R20 shows 17,603 multi-core and 2,485 single-core. Cinebench R15 records 4,224 multi-core and 596 single-core. These results indicate strong scaling across rendering workloads, consistent with the 20-core configuration.

PassMark results further characterize the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus. Multi-thread performance reaches 48,270, while single-thread performance records 4,764. Integer math scores 122,449, floating-point math scores 163,567, and extended instructions score 39,283. Data compression scores 493,179, data encryption scores 37,813, and random string sorting scores 60,020. Physics testing records 3,843, and prime number finding records 482.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is 61,834. The nearest rival in the database is the Intel Core i9-13900KF with an average score of 61,841, a delta of 0%. The Intel Core i9-13900K follows at 61,766 with a 0.1% delta, and the Intel Core i9-13900T scores 61,723 with a 0.2% delta. The Intel Xeon 636 scores 61,360, representing a 0.8% delta. This places the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus essentially on par with the previous generation flagship desktop Core i9 parts, a remarkable result for a mobile processor.

Because the Intel Processor 300 lacks recorded benchmark scores, the database cannot quantify its performance directly. Its 50th percentile ranking indicates mid-pack placement among all CPUs, but no specific workload measurements exist in the database to compare against the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors with vastly different positioning. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a high-end mobile part with 20 cores, a 5.30 GHz boost clock, and benchmark scores rivaling flagship desktop processors from the previous generation. The Intel Processor 300 is a low-end desktop part with 2 cores, no boost clock, and no recorded benchmark data.

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers performance at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, matching the Intel Core i9-13900KF within 0% according to the database. Its 20 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache make it suited for heavily threaded workloads. The Intel Processor 300, at the 50th percentile with 2 cores and 6 MB of L3 cache, targets basic computing tasks where multi-core demand is minimal.

The Intel Processor 300 has no boost clock, meaning it operates at a fixed 3.90 GHz. Its 46 W TDP is lower than the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus's 55 W TDP, but the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers far more performance per watt given its benchmark results. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus also uses a more advanced 3 nm process versus the 10 nm process of the Intel Processor 300.

The Intel Processor 300 does support DDR4 in addition to DDR5, which could matter for builders using older memory. Otherwise, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus dominates in every measured performance dimension, cache capacity, core count, and manufacturing technology.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus | Intel Processor 300 |

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

| Cores | 20 | 2 |

| Threads | 20 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.30 GHz | None |

| TDP | 55 W | 46 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2114 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh | Raptor Lake-S |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | None |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 163 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 30 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | None |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | UHD Graphics 710 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2026-03-16 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | None | $82 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins decisively in multi-threaded performance. With 20 cores versus 2, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus can handle rendering, compilation, data compression, and other parallel workloads at a scale the Intel Processor 300 cannot approach. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,913 reflects this capability. The 30 MB L3 cache also supports larger working sets than the 6 MB on the Intel Processor 300.

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus also wins in single-threaded performance. Its 5.30 GHz boost clock and 3 nm process deliver a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5,917. The Intel Processor 300 has no boost clock and no benchmark data, so the database cannot confirm its single-thread capability, but the architecture gap suggests the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus holds a clear advantage.

In integrated graphics, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, while the Intel Processor 300 uses UHD Graphics 710. The database does not record graphics benchmark scores, but the execution unit count indicates a substantial difference in GPU compute capability.

The Intel Processor 300 wins in memory flexibility. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5, allowing builders to reuse older DDR4 modules. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports only DDR5. The Intel Processor 300 also has a lower TDP at 46 W versus 55 W, which may matter in power-constrained builds, though the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers far more performance per watt based on its benchmark output.

The Intel Processor 300 wins on platform cost through its desktop socket and lower market positioning. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses a mobile BGA socket, which typically ties it to a specific laptop or mini-PC design. The Intel Processor 300 fits standard LGA 1700 desktop motherboards.

For a workstation-class laptop or mobile workstation, the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the clear choice based on the data. For a basic desktop system requiring minimal compute and maximum memory compatibility, the Intel Processor 300 serves that role, though its 50th percentile ranking indicates modest performance relative to the broader CPU market.