Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs Core 2 Extreme X7900
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus outperforms Core 2 Extreme X7900 by a whopping 5959% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3134 | 109 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 35 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 96.78 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Core 2 Extreme | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.62 | 13.24 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Arrow Lake Refresh (2026) |
| Release date | 1 September 2007 (18 years ago) | 11 March 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $851 | $299 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Ultra 7 270K Plus have a nearly equal value for money.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 8 |
| Efficient-cores | no data | 16 |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 5.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 36 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 243 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.1V-1.375V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA478 | FCLGA1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 44 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| SIPP | - | + |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| AMT | + | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
| Supported AI Software Frameworks | - | OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN |
Security technologies
Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 | DDR5-7200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 2 GHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS)7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 FRL) |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 3840 x 2400 @ 120Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 2 Extreme X7900 and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 and 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 24 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.66 | 39.99 |
| Recency | 1 September 2007 | 11 March 2026 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 24 |
| Threads | 2 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 44 Watt | 125 Watt |
Core 2 Extreme X7900 has 184% lower power consumption.
Ultra 7 270K Plus, on the other hand, has a 5959% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 18 years, 1100% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 2067% more advanced lithography process.
The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 2 Extreme X7900 in performance tests.
Be aware that Core 2 Extreme X7900 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
