Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus vs Intel Processor 300 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts compare between the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and the Intel Processor 300?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses 24 cores with 24 threads, while the Intel Processor 300 uses 2 cores with 4 threads. The Core Ultra 9 also supports hyperthreading-style multitasking through its thread count matching its core count, whereas the Processor 300 doubles its thread count over its core count.

Q: What is the difference in their cache configurations?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The Intel Processor 300 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and no boost clock listed. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a lower base clock of 2.70 GHz but boosts up to 5.50 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports DDR5 memory only. The Intel Processor 300 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Processor 300 does not.

Q: How does the integrated graphics differ between the two?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Intel Processor 300 includes UHD Graphics 710.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design families. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename with a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC. It uses 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Intel Processor 300 uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-S codename, built on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a 163 mm² die size.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a mobile-segment processor using the Intel BGA 2114 socket, while the Intel Processor 300 is a desktop-segment processor using the Intel Socket 1700. This fundamental difference in market positioning drives many of the architectural choices.

Cache hierarchy differs substantially. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus allocates 192 KB of L1 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Processor 300 allocates 80 KB of L1 cache and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, with only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9's larger per-core caches and six times the shared L3 capacity give it a significant advantage in data-heavy workloads.

Memory support also diverges. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel Processor 300 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded for it. The Core Ultra 9 supports ECC memory, while the Processor 300 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Processor 300 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Intel Processor 300 is locked. The Core Ultra 9 also has a higher TDP of 55 watts versus 46 watts for the Processor 300.

The release dates show a generation gap. The Intel Processor 300 launched in January 2024, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus launched in March 2026. Both remain in active production status.

The Verdict

The benchmark data makes the performance hierarchy unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 79,574. The Intel Processor 300 sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of zero.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its 24 cores, 36 MB of shared L3 cache, 5.50 GHz boost clock, and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth place it in the upper tier of the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900KF with an average score of 79,371 (0.3% behind the Core Ultra 9), the AMD EPYC 7413 with 80,041 (0.6% ahead), the Intel Core i9-14900K with 79,097 (0.6% behind), and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X with 80,671 (1.4% ahead). These results confirm the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus competes at the top end of desktop and workstation processor performance despite being a mobile-segment part.

The Intel Processor 300 serves a different purpose entirely. With 2 cores, 4 threads, 6 MB of L3 cache, and no boost clock, its recorded data shows no benchmark scores at all. It targets basic desktop computing where the Core Ultra 9's capabilities would be unnecessary. The Processor 300's 3.90 GHz base clock gives it a higher starting frequency than the Core Ultra 9's 2.70 GHz base clock, which can benefit lightly threaded tasks that do not scale beyond two cores.

For users who need maximum multithreaded throughput, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the only option between these two. For users who need a simple, locked desktop processor with DDR4 support, the Intel Processor 300 provides a baseline platform.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus | Intel Processor 300 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 2 |

| Threads | 24 | 4 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.50 GHz | None listed |

| TDP | 55 W | 46 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2114 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh | Raptor Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | Not listed |

| 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 | 36 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

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

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier | Unlocked | Locked |

| Release date | March 2026 | January 2024 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $82 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two processors. However, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an extensive set of recorded benchmark scores, while the Intel Processor 300 has none.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus delivers 39,684 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,356 points in Cinebench R23 single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 21,198 multi-core and 2,992 single-core. Cinebench R15 results show 5,981 multi-core and 340 single-core.

PassMark results for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus cover a wide range of workloads. It scores 658,724 in data compression and 50,008 in data encryption. Extended instructions yield 51,290, while finding prime numbers produces 519. Floating point math reaches 201,773 and integer math reaches 164,839. The multithread score is 59,439 with a physics score of 3,387. Random string sorting scores 80,327, and single-thread performance is 4,951.

The Intel Processor 300 has no corresponding scores in the database. The data gap means no direct numerical comparison can be made between the two processors on identical tests. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus also holds a 95th percentile ranking versus all CPUs in the database, compared to the Processor 300's 50th percentile ranking.

The Core Ultra 9's nearest rivals provide context for its performance tier. The Intel Core i9-14900KF trails by only 0.3%, the AMD EPYC 7413 leads by 0.6%, the Intel Core i9-14900K trails by 0.6%, and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X leads by 1.4%. These delta values place the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus in a tightly contested group at the top of the performance spectrum.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins in every recorded benchmark category because it is the only processor of the two with benchmark data. Its 24 cores and 36 MB of shared L3 cache make it suited for multithreaded rendering, compilation, scientific computing, and content creation workloads where core count scales with performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,684 and PassMark multithread score of 59,439 indicate strong parallel throughput.

The Core Ultra 9 also wins on memory bandwidth with 102.4 GB/s, ECC memory support, and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The unlocked multiplier allows frequency tuning for users who require additional performance beyond stock settings. Its Arc Xe-LPG integrated graphics with 64 execution units provides more capable built-in graphics than the UHD Graphics 710 in the Processor 300.

The Intel Processor 300 wins on base clock frequency with 3.90 GHz compared to the Core Ultra 9's 2.70 GHz. For workloads that rely on single-threaded performance and do not benefit from additional cores, the higher base clock can provide responsive performance. The Processor 300's support for DDR4 memory makes it compatible with older, more widely available memory modules. Its lower TDP of 46 watts versus 55 watts indicates lower power draw. The desktop Socket 1700 platform offers conventional desktop motherboard compatibility.

The Processor 300 also wins on launch MSRP at $82, though the Core Ultra 9 has no listed launch MSRP. The Processor 300's locked multiplier simplifies system configuration for basic desktop use.

The use-case split is clear. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus targets high-performance mobile computing with workstation-class throughput. The Intel Processor 300 targets entry-level desktop computing where cost and simplicity take priority over raw performance. The data shows no overlap in their performance envelopes.