Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual split between these two desktop processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus takes only 3. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the Ultra 7 sits at 93,785, while the Ultra 9 trails at 84,003. That is a 9,782-point gap in favor of the lower-tier part.

The largest margin of victory belongs to the Ultra 9 in Cinebench R23 single-core. It scores 7,303 against the Ultra 7's 2,439, a delta of -66.6% from the Ultra 7's perspective. That is a massive single-threaded advantage. The Ultra 9 also wins Cinebench R15 single-core decisively, posting 736 versus 354, a -51.9% delta. Its third win comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 51,731 against 44,253, a -14.5% delta.

The Ultra 7 dominates everywhere else. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 6,656 against 5,214, a 27.7% advantage. The Cinebench R20 results are close but favor the Ultra 7: 24,461 versus 21,727 in multi-core (12.6% delta) and 3,453 versus 3,067 in single-core (12.6% delta). The PassMark suite shows consistent Ultra 7 wins. Data compression: 804,322 versus 698,346 (15.2% delta). Data encryption: 59,097 versus 52,563 (12.4% delta). Extended instructions: 63,506 versus 52,338 (21.3% delta). Find prime numbers: 615 versus 503 (22.3% delta). Floating point math: 229,491 versus 214,760 (6.9% delta). Integer math: 175,986 versus 166,194 (5.9% delta). Multithread: 68,574 versus 60,860 (12.7% delta). Physics: 4,064 versus 3,315 (22.6% delta). Random string sorting: 96,945 versus 79,744 (21.6% delta). Single-thread: 5,068 versus 4,823 (5.1% delta).

The pattern is clear. The Ultra 9 wins only in Cinebench R23 multi-core and both single-core tests within that specific benchmark family. The Ultra 7 wins every PassMark test and the other Cinebench versions. The data suggests the Ultra 7 is the more consistent performer across the broader benchmark set.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the winner for workloads that stress the processor across many threads and diverse instruction patterns. Its PassMark wins span encryption, compression, sorting, prime number calculation, and math operations. Physics simulations favor it by 22.6%. The multithread score of 68,574 against 60,860 indicates stronger overall parallel throughput in the PassMark methodology. The Ultra 7 also holds a 5.1% edge in single-thread PassMark, so it is not merely a multi-core specialist.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus shows its strength in specific Cinebench tests. The R23 single-core score of 7,303 is the standout, nearly three times the Ultra 7's 2,439. This suggests exceptional per-core performance in that benchmark's rendering workload. The R15 single-core result is similarly disproportionate at 736 versus 354. The Ultra 9 also wins R23 multi-core by 14.5%, indicating that in this particular render test, its architecture scales better across cores.

The benchmark results do not align with the product tier labels. The Ultra 7 outperforms the Ultra 9 in 14 tests, including all PassMark categories. The Ultra 9's wins are concentrated in Cinebench R23 and R15 single-core, plus R23 multi-core. Users running Cinebench R23 specifically would see a clear benefit from the Ultra 9. Users running PassMark-based diagnostics or other Cinebench versions would prefer the Ultra 7.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus as the stronger overall processor. Its average benchmark score of 93,785 places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, matching the Ultra 9's percentile. The nearest rival to the Ultra 7 is the Intel Xeon 6520P with an average score of 93,786, a 0% delta. The AMD EPYC 4564P trails by 1.5%, the EPYC 9175F by 1.9%, and the EPYC 4565P by 2.1%. The Ultra 7 sits comfortably among server-class parts.

The Ultra 9's average score of 84,003 also lands in the 96th percentile, but its nearest rivals are different. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K scores 83,807, a 0.2% delta in favor of the 290K Plus. The AMD EPYC 4584PX is 1.1% behind, and the EPYC 9135 is 1.2% behind. The EPYC 7F72 is 1.3% ahead. The Ultra 9 is competitive with its immediate peers, but it sits below the Ultra 7 in absolute terms.

For general desktop use, the Ultra 7 is the data-backed choice. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests. Its PassMark single-thread score of 5,068 beats the Ultra 9's 4,823, so even light workloads see a benefit. The Ultra 9 should be selected only for users whose primary application is Cinebench R23, where it leads by 14.5% in multi-core and 66.6% in single-core. The Ultra 7's launch MSRP is $299. The Ultra 9 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93,785, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 84,003.

Q: How many head-to-head tests does each processor win?

A: The Ultra 7 wins 14 of the 17 recorded comparisons, and the Ultra 9 wins 3.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ultra 9 scores 7,303 versus the Ultra 7's 2,439, a -66.6% delta from the Ultra 7's perspective.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Are there any tests where the Ultra 9 wins?

A: Yes, the Ultra 9 wins Cinebench R15 single-core, Cinebench R23 single-core, and Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for both CPUs?

A: Both the Ultra 7 and the Ultra 9 are in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture. They are built on the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2. The process node is 3 nm, fabricated by TSMC. The transistor count is identical at 17,800 million, and the die size is the same at 243 mm². The cache hierarchy matches exactly: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

The integrated graphics are identical as well: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Both support DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on both. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Both use the Intel Socket 1851 and have a 125 W TDP. The multiplier is unlocked on both, indicating overclocking capability.

The key architectural difference is the generation label. The Ultra 7 is listed as "Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake)" and the Ultra 9 as "Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake)". The boost clock differs: the Ultra 7 reaches 5.50 GHz, while the Ultra 9 reaches 5.80 GHz. The base clock is the same at 3.70 GHz. The production status is Active for both, but the release dates differ. The Ultra 7 has a recorded release date of 2026-03-10, while the Ultra 9 has no recorded release date. The Ultra 7 has a part number of SA4V6, while the Ultra 9's part number is listed as unknown.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows only a few fields where the two processors differ. The boost clock is higher on the Ultra 9 at 5.80 GHz versus 5.50 GHz on the Ultra 7. The generation field labels them differently: "Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake)" for the 270K Plus and "Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake)" for the 290K Plus. The release date is recorded for the Ultra 7 as 2026-03-10, but the Ultra 9 has no recorded release date. The launch MSRP is $299 for the Ultra 7, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 9. The part number is SA4V6 for the Ultra 7 and unknown for the Ultra 9.

All other specifications are identical. Both have 24 cores and 24 threads. The base clock is 3.70 GHz on both. The TDP is 125 W for each. The socket is Intel Socket 1851 for both. The process node is 3 nm, the foundry is TSMC, and the transistor count is 17,800 million on both. The die size is 243 mm² for both. The cache is the same: 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB L3 shared. Memory support is DDR5 dual-channel with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth on both. ECC memory is supported on both. PCIe is Gen 5 with 20 lanes on both. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG with 64 EU on both. Both have unlocked multipliers and are in the Desktop market segment with Active production status.