Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX dominates the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H across every recorded benchmark. The data shows 17 wins for the 275HX and zero for the 386H. The largest margins appear in compute-heavy workloads. In PassMark integer math, the 275HX scores 155218 against 87284, a 77.8% advantage. Floating point math shows a 76.2% lead (191186 versus 108527). Random string sorting follows closely at 76.4% (74320 versus 42135). Data compression delivers a 72.7% edge (608381 versus 352365), and data encryption shows 73.5% (47112 versus 27150).

Cinebench results reinforce the pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 275HX scores 35589 against 20547, a 73.2% lead. The R15 multi-core test shows 5619.5 versus 3223, a 74.4% gap. The R20 multi-core test records 19899 versus 12820, a 55.2% difference. The single-core results are closer but still favor the 275HX. Cinebench R20 single-core gives the 275HX a 55.3% lead (2809 versus 1809), which is surprisingly large for a single-threaded test. The R15 single-core test shows a 10% edge (334 versus 303.5), while R23 single-core shows only 6.4% (2204 versus 2071.5). PassMark single-thread shows an 11.7% lead (4713 versus 4218).

The smallest multi-core gap appears in PassMark physics, where the 275HX leads by 10.2% (3338 versus 3028). PassMark find prime numbers shows a 31.4% edge (448 versus 341), and extended instructions show 61.4% (47016 versus 29138). The overall average benchmark score for the 275HX is 67469, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. The 386H averages 43210, which puts it in the 88th percentile. The 275HX sits close to the Intel Xeon w5-3525 (67673, 0.3% behind) and AMD EPYC 4484PX (67822, 0.5% behind), while the 386H trades blows with the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (43326, 0.3% behind) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (43431, 0.5% behind).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX wins every multi-core test. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 35589 versus 20547 (73.2% ahead), and PassMark multithread shows 55759 versus 35399 (57.5% ahead).

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The 275HX leads in all single-core tests, but the margins are smaller. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2204 versus 2071.5 (6.4%), R15 single-core shows 334 versus 303.5 (10%), and PassMark single-thread shows 4713 versus 4218 (11.7%). The R20 single-core test is the outlier at 2809 versus 1809 (55.3%).

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each chip?

A: The 275HX sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 67469. The 386H sits in the 88th percentile with an average score of 43210.

Q: Which processor uses less power?

A: The 386H has a TDP of 25 watts, while the 275HX has a TDP of 55 watts. The 386H uses less power, though the 275HX delivers substantially higher performance.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The 275HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the 386H does not.

Q: Which chip has more cores?

A: The 275HX has 24 cores and 24 threads. The 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither uses simultaneous multithreading.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations. The 275HX belongs to Core Ultra Series 2 and uses Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Arrow Lake-HX codename, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The 386H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3 and uses Panther Lake architecture, also on a 3 nm node but fabricated by Intel. Both are mobile parts, but their sockets differ: the 275HX uses Intel BGA 2114, while the 386H uses Intel BGA 2540.

The cache layouts diverge significantly. Both chips share the same 192 KB L1 per core. The L2 differs: the 275HX has 3 MB per core, while the 386H has 2.5 MB per core. The shared L3 is a major differentiator. The 275HX has 36 MB shared, exactly double the 18 MB shared on the 386H. This larger cache pool explains part of the 275HX's lead in data-heavy tests like PassMark random string sorting, where it scores 74320 versus 42135.

The integrated graphics also differ. The 275HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The 386H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The 386H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the 275HX lists DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The 386H has a higher memory bandwidth rating at 115.2 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s for the 275HX. This is notable because the 275HX still wins all memory-sensitive benchmarks despite the lower bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The 275HX offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 386H offers Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Neither supports ECC memory. The 275HX has the part number SRVFK, and the 386H has SA4R5Q9EH. The 275HX was released on January 12, 2025, while the 386H was released on January 4, 2026. The 386H is the newer part, but it does not catch the older chip in any measured workload.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ directly: 24 cores and 24 threads for the 275HX versus 16 cores and 16 threads for the 386H. The base clock on the 275HX is 2.70 GHz versus 2.10 GHz on the 386H. The boost clock is 5.40 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The TDP is 55 watts versus 25 watts. The 275HX uses the BGA 2114 socket, while the 386H uses the BGA 2540 socket.

The L2 cache per core is 3 MB on the 275HX and 2.5 MB on the 386H. The shared L3 is 36 MB versus 18 MB. Memory support lists DDR5 for the 275HX and DDR5 plus LPDDR5X for the 386H. Memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s for the 275HX and 115.2 GB/s for the 386H. PCIe lanes are 20 on the 275HX and 12 on the 386H, both Gen 5. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG 64EU on the 275HX and Intel Xe3 on the 386H.

The multiplier is unlocked on the 275HX and locked on the 386H. The 275HX lists 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the 386H has no recorded transistor count or die size. The release dates differ by roughly a year, with the 275HX arriving first. Both carry active production status and target the mobile market segment.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks against the 386H. Its average benchmark score of 67469 versus 43210 represents a 56.1% overall advantage. The 275HX also holds a higher percentile ranking at 94 versus 88. The 386H is the more power-efficient part on paper, with a 25 watt TDP against 55 watts, and it offers higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s. It also uses a newer architecture (Panther Lake) and a newer fabrication source (Intel fabs).

However, none of those advantages translate into benchmark wins. The 275HX leads by double digits in nearly every category, with the closest margins in Cinebench R23 single-core (6.4%) and PassMark physics (10.2%). The largest gaps exceed 77%, as seen in integer math. For workloads that scale with cores, cache, and clock speed, the 275HX is the stronger choice. The 386H is for systems where power draw, memory bandwidth, and a newer platform matter more than raw throughput. The data does not support any scenario where the 386H outperforms the 275HX in measured performance.

Where Each One Wins

The 275HX wins every benchmark in the database. Its strengths are most pronounced in multi-threaded rendering and math workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core at 35589 and PassMark multithread at 55759 show the advantage of 24 cores over 16. Integer math, floating point math, data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting all favor the 275HX by margins between 31.4% and 77.8%. Its 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 support these results. The unlocked multiplier gives it additional flexibility for users who can tune the system.

The 386H does not win any recorded test, but its data shows specific strengths. It has a 25 watt TDP, which is less than half the 275HX's 55 watts. It supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, and its memory bandwidth is higher at 115.2 GB/s. Its Intel Xe3 integrated graphics represent a newer generation than the Arc Xe-LPG on the 275HX. The 386H also uses the Panther Lake architecture, which is a newer design from Intel's own fabs. Its closest benchmark results are in single-threaded tests: Cinebench R23 single-core trails by only 6.4%, and PassMark physics trails by 10.2%. The 386H is the part for low-power mobile systems where the newer platform and memory flexibility matter more than peak compute performance.