Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs M2 Ultra
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Core Ultra 7 270K Plus | M2 Ultra | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cinebench 2024 single-core | 145 | 126 | +15.1% |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 2,482 | 1,918 | +29.4% |
| Cores | 24 (8P+16E) | 24 (16P+8E) | — |
| TDP (base W) | 125 | 80 | — |
- Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is faster than M2 Ultra by 15.1% in single-core and faster by 29.4% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
- M2 Ultra draws less power (80W vs 125W base TDP).
Verdict: Core Ultra 7 270K Plus or M2 Ultra?
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus advantages
- Single-core speed (+13%)
- Multi-core speed (+23%)
M2 Ultra advantages
- Power efficiency (+36%)
Which should you choose?
- Choose the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus if you mainly game or want snappy everyday responsiveness.
- Choose the M2 Ultra if you want a cooler, quieter and more power-efficient build.
- Choose the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus if you render video, compile code or run heavy multitasking.
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs M2 Ultra: which should you choose?
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus — 24-core Intel processor (8P+16E) scoring 145 single-core and 2482 multi-core in Cinebench 2024, with a 125 W TDP and 36 MB L3 cache.
M2 Ultra — 24-core Apple processor (16P+8E) scoring 126 single-core and 1918 multi-core in Cinebench 2024, with a 80 W TDP.
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs M2 Ultra: Core Ultra 7 270K Plus leads in multi-core performance. Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is faster than M2 Ultra by 15.1% in single-core and faster by 29.4% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024). M2 Ultra draws less power (80W vs 125W base TDP).
Gaming and single-threaded work
Games and everyday responsiveness lean on single-core speed. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus leads there with a single-core score of 145 versus 126, so it is the marginally better pick for high-refresh gaming — though at typical resolutions the GPU usually decides frame rates.
Content creation and multitasking
For rendering, compilation, video export and other all-core workloads, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is stronger, posting 2,482 multi-core against 1,918 in Cinebench 2024. Its 24 cores (8 performance + 16 efficiency) give it real headroom for heavy parallel jobs.
Power and platform
The M2 Ultra is the more efficient chip at 80 W versus 125 W, which means less heat, quieter cooling and lower running costs under sustained load.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the processor comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus better than the M2 Ultra?
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the clearly stronger overall choice, winning most of the dimensions that matter. Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is faster than M2 Ultra by 15.1% in single-core and faster by 29.4% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
What is the main difference between the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the M2 Ultra?
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is faster than M2 Ultra by 15.1% in single-core and faster by 29.4% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024). M2 Ultra draws less power (80W vs 125W base TDP).
Which should I choose?
Choose the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus if you mainly game or want snappy everyday responsiveness. Choose the M2 Ultra if you want a cooler, quieter and more power-efficient build.
Methodology
Processors are compared on Cinebench 2024 single-core and multi-core scores from published leaderboard results, alongside core configuration (performance + efficiency cores), base TDP, L3 cache, PassMark CPU Mark, 1080p gaming scores and street pricing where measured. Cinebench reflects rendering-style workloads; gaming performance depends heavily on the GPU and the specific title, so treat single-core standing as directional. Figures reflect the leaderboard snapshot on the page date.