Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus vs Intel Processor N250 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows an extreme performance gap between the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and the Intel Processor N250, though direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons are limited by the N250's lack of recorded benchmark scores. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,684 and a single-core score of 2,356. Its Cinebench R20 results reach 21,198 multi-core and 2,992 single-core, while Cinebench R15 shows 5,981 multi-core and 340 single-core. The N250 has no benchmark entries in the database, so its measured performance cannot be compared numerically.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus posts an average benchmark score of 79,574, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The N250 sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero, which reflects the absence of recorded results rather than a literal zero-performance rating. Among the nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, the Intel Core i9-14900KF averages 79,371 (0.3% behind), the AMD EPYC 7413 averages 80,041 (0.6% ahead), the Intel Core i9-14900K averages 79,097 (0.6% behind), and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X averages 80,671 (1.4% ahead). These deltas place the 290HX Plus in a tightly contested bracket with flagship desktop and server parts, despite being a mobile processor.

PassMark results for the 290HX Plus further illustrate its compute profile: multi-thread score of 59,439, single-thread score of 4,951, integer math at 164,839, floating point math at 201,773, data compression at 658,724, data encryption at 50,008, extended instructions at 51,290, physics at 3,387, and random string sorting at 80,327. The find prime numbers score is 519. These figures indicate a processor optimized for heavily parallel workloads, with the floating point and integer math results showing substantial throughput capacity. The N250's absence from these tests means no direct comparison is possible, but its 4-core, 4-thread configuration and 6 W TDP suggest a fundamentally different performance class.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename with a 3 nm process node from TSMC. It contains 24 cores and 24 threads, which indicates a design without hyperthreading, and uses 17,800 million transistors across a 243 mm² die. The N250 uses the Twin Lake architecture with a 10 nm Intel process node, holding 4 cores and 4 threads. The manufacturing process difference of 3 nm versus 10 nm gives the 290HX Plus a substantial transistor density advantage, though the N250's smaller core count reduces its overall complexity.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The 290HX Plus provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The N250 offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The 290HX Plus therefore has roughly six times the L3 capacity and a per-core L1 allocation that is double the N250's. The L2 organization also differs: the 290HX Plus uses a per-core allocation, while the N250 shares its L2 across all cores.

Memory support separates the two as well. The 290HX Plus supports DDR5 over a dual-channel memory bus with a peak bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. The N250 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s peak bandwidth and no ECC support. The 290HX Plus delivers 2.7 times the memory bandwidth of the N250, which matters for cache-heavy workloads and multi-core scaling. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 290HX Plus uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the N250 uses Gen 3 with 9 lanes.

Clock behavior shows a similar divide. The 290HX Plus has a 2.70 GHz base clock and a 5.50 GHz boost clock, while the N250 has a 0.10 GHz base clock and a 3.80 GHz boost clock. The N250's extremely low base clock likely reflects an aggressive power-saving design, since its TDP is only 6 W compared to the 290HX Plus's 55 W. The 290HX Plus also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the N250's multiplier is locked. Integrated graphics differ: the 290HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the N250 uses UHD Graphics 730. Both are mobile processors, but the 290HX Plus uses socket Intel BGA 2114, while the N250 uses Intel BGA 1264, so they are not socket-compatible.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Processor N250 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Intel Processor N250 boosts to 3.80 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel Processor N250 has a 6 W TDP.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports ECC memory, while the Intel Processor N250 does not.

Q: Which processor uses a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Processor N250 uses 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus reaches 102.4 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5. The Intel Processor N250 reaches 38.4 GB/s over single-channel DDR4, DDR5, or LPDDR5.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is designed for high-performance mobile computing. Its 24 cores, 36 MB of L3 cache, 5.50 GHz boost clock, and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth place it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900KF, Core i9-14900K, AMD EPYC 7413, and Intel Xeon w5-2565X, all within a 1.4% average score margin. This suggests the 290HX Plus competes at the top tier of desktop and server-class processors despite its mobile designation. The unlocked multiplier and ECC support add flexibility for compute-focused users.

The Intel Processor N250 is a low-power mobile chip with 4 cores, 6 MB of L3 cache, a 3.80 GHz boost clock, and 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. Its 6 W TDP and 10 nm Intel process align it with efficiency-focused designs. The N250 occupies the 50th percentile, though this ranking is based on no recorded benchmark scores. The single-channel memory bus and Gen 3 PCIe lanes further indicate a role in lightweight, power-constrained systems rather than compute-intensive workloads.

Benchmark results show the 290HX Plus delivers 39,684 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4,951 in PassMark single-thread, with an average benchmark score of 79,574. The N250 has no recorded scores to counter these figures. Users requiring multi-threaded throughput, large cache capacity, high memory bandwidth, or ECC support should select the 290HX Plus. Users prioritizing minimal power draw, small physical footprint, or compatibility with DDR4 and LPDDR5 memory should consider the N250, based strictly on the recorded specifications. The two processors serve separate market segments, and the database shows no overlap in their intended performance envelopes.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus | Intel Processor N250 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 4 |

| Threads | 24 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 0.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 6 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2114 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Codename | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh | Twin Lake |

| Process Node | 3 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB per core | 96 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB per core | 2 MB shared |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes | Gen 3, 9 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Multiplier | Unlocked | Locked |

| Release Date | 2026-03-16 | 2025-01-06 |

| Part Number | SADSS | SRPNS |

| Percentile | 95th | 50th |