Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus vs Intel Processor U301L Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and the Intel Processor U301L occupy vastly different performance tiers, and the recorded data confirms this without requiring extensive cross-referencing. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a complete set of benchmark scores across Cinebench and PassMark suites, while the U301L has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This absence of data for the U301L means the comparison is effectively one-sided, but the available numbers for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus still provide a clear picture of its standing.

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 show 21,198 multi-core and 2,992 single-core, while Cinebench R15 records 5,981 multi-core and 340 single-core. These scores position the processor in the 95th percentile against all CPUs in the database, indicating it outperforms the vast majority of recorded processors. The average benchmark score of 79,574 places it close to several high-end desktop parts. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-14900KF, averages 79,371, a delta of 0.3 percent in favor of the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus. The AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80,041, which is 0.6 percent higher, and the Intel Core i9-14900K trails at 79,097, a 0.6 percent deficit. The Intel Xeon w5-2565X leads the group with 80,671, putting the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus 1.4 percent behind.

PassMark results for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus show strong throughput in specific workloads. The multi-thread score is 59,439, and the single-thread score is 4,951. Integer math reaches 164,839, while floating point math hits 201,773. Data compression scores 658,724, and data encryption records 50,008. Extended instructions produce 51,290, random string sorting yields 80,327, find prime numbers completes at 519, and physics processing scores 3,387. These figures demonstrate consistent high performance across diverse computational tasks.

The U301L, by contrast, has no benchmark entries. Its percentile ranking of 50 places it at the median of all CPUs, but without actual scores, the database cannot substantiate any specific performance claim. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and neither processor records a win in the winsA or winsB fields. This means the analysis must rely on the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus's complete dataset and the U301L's specification profile to draw conclusions.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins every measurable category in this comparison, purely because it has recorded scores and the U301L does not. The multi-core Cinebench R23 result of 39,684 indicates strong parallel processing capability, suitable for rendering, compilation, and other heavily threaded tasks. The single-core score of 2,356 in the same test shows competitive per-thread performance, which matters for responsiveness and lightly threaded applications. PassMark data reinforces this: integer math at 164,839 and floating point math at 201,773 suggest balanced arithmetic throughput, while data compression at 658,724 points to efficient file handling and archival workloads.

The U301L cannot claim any benchmark win from the recorded data. Its specifications, however, hint at its intended role. With 5 cores and 6 threads, a base clock of 1.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 2.20 GHz, it targets low-power, basic computing tasks. The 15 TDP suggests energy-conscious designs, and its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory adds flexibility for system builders. The U301L also uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is a desktop-oriented platform, despite its mobile market segment designation. Its integrated UHD Graphics 64EU provides display output without a discrete GPU, making it suitable for entry-level systems.

In practical terms, the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus dominates in every workload category with recorded data. The U301L's role is limited to scenarios where its lower power draw and modest specifications are sufficient, but the database contains no benchmark evidence to quantify that performance. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, which means the formal comparison yields no victories for either side, yet the available scores make the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus's superiority clear in any task that benefits from its 24 cores and 24 threads.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus averages 79,574. The Intel Core i9-14900KF scores 79,371, a delta of 0.3 percent in favor of the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus. The AMD EPYC 7413 is 0.6 percent higher at 80,041, the Intel Core i9-14900K is 0.6 percent lower at 79,097, and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X leads by 1.4 percent at 80,671.

Q: What benchmark scores does the Intel Processor U301L have in the database?

A: The U301L has no recorded benchmark scores. Its benchmarks array is empty, and its average benchmark score is 0. The database does not provide any Cinebench or PassMark results for this processor.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus ranks in the 95th percentile against all CPUs in the database. The Intel Processor U301L ranks in the 50th percentile.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Processor U301L has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock speed for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz. The Intel Processor U301L boosts to 2.20 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports ECC memory with a value of true. The Intel Processor U301L does not support ECC memory, with a value of false.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification field. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Processor U301L has 5 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and 1.20 GHz for the U301L. Boost clocks are 5.50 GHz and 2.20 GHz, respectively. The TDP is 55 for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and 15 for the U301L.

The cache hierarchy also differs substantially. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The U301L has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support shows the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus using DDR5 only, while the U301L supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is listed at 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, but the U301L has no recorded memory bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the U301L uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64EU for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and UHD Graphics with 64EU for the U301L. The multiplier is unlocked on the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and locked on the U301L. The socket is Intel BGA 2114 for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and Intel Socket 1700 for the U301L. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a launch MSRP of none, while the U301L has a launch MSRP of $107. The release dates are 2026-03-16 for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and 2024-04-07 for the U301L.

Architecture Differences

The architecture and manufacturing details separate these processors into distinct generations. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, with a codename of Arrow Lake-HX Refresh and a generation label of Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX). It is fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a die size of 243 mm². The U301L uses the Raptor Lake architecture with a codename of Raptor Lake-PS and a generation label of Intel Processor (Raptor Lake). It is built on a 10 nm process by Intel, with no transistor count or die size recorded.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a production status of Active and a market segment of Mobile. The U301L also has a production status of Active and a market segment of Mobile, despite using Socket 1700. ECC memory support is true for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and false for the U301L. The part numbers are SADSS for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and SRPKFQ5CW for the U301L.

The process node difference is significant: 3 nm versus 10 nm. This, combined with the transistor count of 17,800 million for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, indicates a much denser and more advanced design. The U301L has no recorded transistor or die size data, so a direct comparison on those fields is not possible. The cache architecture also reflects the generational gap, with the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus offering larger per-core L1 and L2 caches and a 36 MB shared L3, versus 8 MB for the U301L.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the higher-performing processor by a wide margin. Its 95th percentile ranking, complete benchmark scores, and proximity to desktop-class rivals such as the Intel Core i9-14900KF (0.3 percent ahead) and AMD EPYC 7413 (0.6 percent behind) place it in a premium performance tier. The 24 cores, 24 threads, 5.50 GHz boost clock, and 36 MB of L3 cache support demanding multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads alike. The 3 nm process from TSMC and 17,800 million transistors indicate a modern, high-density design.

The Intel Processor U301L, with no benchmark scores in the database, cannot be positioned on measured performance. Its specifications suggest a low-power, entry-level part: 5 cores, 6 threads, a 1.20 GHz base clock, a 2.20 GHz boost clock, 8 MB of L3 cache, and a 15 TDP. The 50th percentile ranking reflects its median status among all CPUs, but this ranking is not backed by any recorded score. Its support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory and the unlocked multiplier false setting further indicate a fixed, efficiency-oriented design.

For users selecting between these two, the choice depends entirely on workload requirements. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is appropriate for applications that benefit from high core counts, fast clocks, and large caches, such as content creation, scientific computing, or heavy multitasking. The U301L is suited to basic computing needs where low power consumption and modest performance are acceptable, though the database provides no measured evidence of its capabilities. The recorded data favors the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus in every measurable aspect, and the absence of U301L benchmarks means no competing performance claims can be substantiated.