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

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark database presents an unusual comparison: the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus arrives with a full suite of 17 recorded benchmark results, while the Intel Processor 300 has no recorded benchmark entries at all. This asymmetry shapes the entire analysis. The data shows the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the only processor in this pairing with measurable performance evidence, and it occupies the 96th percentile among all CPUs tracked in the database. The Intel Processor 300, by contrast, sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero, indicating no recorded measurements exist for it.

For workloads that stress multi-core throughput, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus demonstrates overwhelming capability. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score reaches 44253, while its Cinebench R20 multicore result lands at 24461 and Cinebench R15 multicore at 6656. The PassMark multithread score of 68574 reinforces this pattern, as do the specialized math and encryption workloads: integer math scores 175986, floating point math scores 229491, and data encryption scores 59097. These figures position the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus as a processor built for heavily threaded production tasks, content creation, and compute-intensive workloads.

Single-threaded performance also favors the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, though the margin is less dramatic within its own benchmark set. The PassMark single thread score of 5068, Cinebench R23 singlecore at 2439, Cinebench R20 singlecore at 3453, and Cinebench R15 singlecore at 354 all indicate strong per-core speed. The boost clock of 5.50 GHz supports this interpretation, as the processor can scale frequency aggressively on lightly threaded tasks.

The Intel Processor 300, lacking any benchmark entries, cannot be assigned wins in any category. Its specifications suggest a different purpose: 2 cores, 4 threads, a 3.90 GHz base clock, and no boost clock listed. It carries a 46 W TDP and uses Intel Socket 1700, placing it in an entirely different performance envelope. The database records no scores for this part, so any claim about its benchmark behavior would be unsupported.

The wins tally in the database reflects this reality: winsA equals 0 and winsB equals 0, with no head-to-head benchmark entries recorded. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins by default in every measured category simply because it is the only processor with data. The Intel Processor 300 wins no categories, as no measurements exist to compare.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for users selecting between these two desktop processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus delivers a complete performance profile across both single-core and multi-core workloads, backed by an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon 6520P with an average score of 93786 and a delta of 0%, the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95183 with a delta of -1.5%, the AMD EPYC 9175F at 95615 with a delta of -1.9%, and the AMD EPYC 4565P at 95764 with a delta of -2.1%. These comparisons place the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus within roughly 2% of several high-end server processors, an impressive standing for a desktop part.

The Intel Processor 300, with no benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of zero, cannot be positioned relative to any rivals. Its 50th percentile ranking suggests it falls in the middle of the database's tracked CPUs, but without recorded measurements, the database cannot confirm its actual performance. Users seeking a processor for demanding workloads should select the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, as it is the only option with verified performance data. Users considering the Intel Processor 300 would be choosing a part without any recorded benchmark evidence, making its real-world behavior uncertain.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus also offers a higher ceiling for system builders: an unlocked multiplier enables overclocking, while the Intel Processor 300 has a locked multiplier. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports ECC memory, whereas the Intel Processor 300 does not. Both factors matter for workstation and server-adjacent use cases, and the data confirms the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the stronger choice in every measurable respect.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the Intel Processor 300. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty, and both winsA and winsB are zero. This means the comparison relies entirely on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's standalone benchmark scores, which are extensive.

Within the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's own results, the largest scores appear in PassMark data compression at 804322, PassMark random string sorting at 96945, and PassMark extended instructions at 63506. These figures indicate strong performance in data manipulation and compression workloads. The Cinebench suite shows consistent scaling: R15 multicore at 6656, R20 multicore at 24461, and R23 multicore at 44253, a progression that reflects the increasing complexity of the rendering workloads. Single-core Cinebench scores follow a similar pattern: R15 at 354, R20 at 3453, and R23 at 2439.

The PassMark physics score of 4064 and the find prime numbers score of 615 round out the picture. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's 24 cores and 24 threads provide the hardware foundation for these results, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache and a 3 MB per-core L2 cache supporting data-heavy operations. The 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and dual-channel DDR5 support further enable these scores.

Since the Intel Processor 300 has no benchmark entries, no direct score comparison is possible. The database simply cannot show how the two parts perform side by side. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's scores stand alone as the only quantitative evidence in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Processor 300 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the Intel Processor 300, and its average benchmark score is recorded as zero.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785. The Intel Xeon 6520P scores 93786 with a 0% delta, the AMD EPYC 4564P scores 95183 with a -1.5% delta, the AMD EPYC 9175F scores 95615 with a -1.9% delta, and the AMD EPYC 4565P scores 95764 with a -2.1% delta.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the clock speed difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Intel Processor 300 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and no boost clock listed.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor 300 does not.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. The Intel Processor 300 uses Intel Socket 1700.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the Intel Processor 300 differ fundamentally in architecture. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, with the codename Arrow Lake Refresh and a generation listing of Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake). It is built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors and a die size of 243 mm². The Intel Processor 300 uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-S, built on a 10 nm process node at Intel with a die size of 163 mm². No transistor count is recorded for the Intel Processor 300.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus packs 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 offers just 2 cores and 4 threads. Cache hierarchies reflect this gap: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300 delivers 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support also separates the two. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 memory only, with dual-channel configuration and a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Intel Processor 300 supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no memory bandwidth is recorded. PCIe capabilities differ as well: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Processor 300 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics take different paths. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Intel Processor 300 uses UHD Graphics 710. The production status for both is Active, but their release dates differ: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus launched on 2026-03-10, while the Intel Processor 300 launched on 2024-01-07.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are close: 3.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and 3.90 GHz for the Intel Processor 300. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus adds a 5.50 GHz boost clock, while the Intel Processor 300 lists none.

TDP separates them dramatically. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus draws 125 W, while the Intel Processor 300 draws 46 W. Sockets differ: Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, Intel Socket 1700 for the Intel Processor 300. The process nodes differ: 3 nm at TSMC for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, 10 nm at Intel for the Intel Processor 300. Transistor counts and die sizes also diverge: 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, with no transistor count and a 163 mm² die for the Intel Processor 300.

Cache specifications are markedly different. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Intel Processor 300 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 only with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Processor 300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with no bandwidth recorded. ECC memory is supported on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus but not on the Intel Processor 300.

PCIe lanes: 20 Gen 5 lanes for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, 16 Gen 5 lanes for the Intel Processor 300. Integrated graphics: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU versus UHD Graphics 710. The multiplier is unlocked on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and locked on the Intel Processor 300. Launch MSRP: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus launched at $299, and the Intel Processor 300 launched at $82. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus sits in the 96th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Processor 300 sits in the 50th percentile.