Intel Core 3 100HL vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data separates these two processors cleanly. The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins every single recorded benchmark, 17 out of 17 head-to-head tests, with no exceptions. The Intel Core 3 100HL does not take a single win in any workload category. This is not a close contest by any metric.

The Core 9 273PQE sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 3 100HL sits at the 76th percentile. The average benchmark score gap is massive: 66099 for the Core 9 versus 23545 for the Core 3. The Core 9 273PQE's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (0.3% ahead) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (1.1% behind), which places it in flagship-class territory. The Core 3 100HL, by contrast, trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U (0.7% behind) and the Intel Core i5-11500 (0.7% behind), placing it firmly in the mid-range segment.

Buyers should pick the Core 9 273PQE for any workload that demands high thread counts, heavy compute, or fast single-core response. The data shows it leads by 61.9% or more in most Cinebench tests, and by 18.3% in single-thread Passmark. The Core 3 100HL is the choice only when the lower 45W TDP matters more than performance, since it draws 80W less than the Core 9's 125W TDP. The Core 3 100HL also offers a substantially lower launch MSRP of $589 for the Core 9, though the Core 3 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. The Core 9 also supports ECC memory, which the Core 3 does not, making it the only option for error-correcting memory configurations.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins everywhere, but the margin varies by workload type. The largest advantage appears in prime number finding, where it beats the Core 3 by 75.8% (198 versus 48 in Passmark find prime numbers). Extended instruction workloads show a 67.8% lead (38743 versus 12463), and floating point math shows a 66.5% lead (125546 versus 42108). These are compute-heavy tasks that scale with core count and clock speed, and the Core 9's 12 cores and 24 threads simply overwhelm the Core 3's 8 cores and 12 threads.

The smallest advantage appears in single-threaded Passmark, where the Core 9 leads by only 18.3% (4573 versus 3735). The single-core Cinebench tests show a larger 61.9% gap, which indicates the Core 9's 5.90 GHz boost clock provides a substantial single-core advantage over the Core 3's 4.60 GHz boost. The Core 9 also holds a 56.3% lead in random string sorting (53167 versus 23223), which is the narrowest multi-threaded gap, and a 59.6% lead in data encryption (29636 versus 11964).

The Core 3 100HL has no recorded wins, so it cannot be recommended for any specific workload based on benchmark performance. Its only advantages in the specification data are the lower 45W TDP and the integrated Iris Xe Graphics 48EU, which may be relevant for power-constrained builds or systems that rely on the iGPU. The Core 9's UHD Graphics 770 is the only integrated option there, and it does not carry the Iris Xe name.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel lines. The Core 3 100HL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the Core 9 273PQE uses Bartlett Lake architecture with the same codename as its generation. Both are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and both use the Intel Socket 1700.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The Core 3 has 8 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 9 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 9 doubles the thread count, which explains its large multi-threaded benchmark leads. Base clocks differ by 1.30 GHz (2.10 GHz versus 3.40 GHz) and boost clocks differ by 1.30 GHz (4.60 GHz versus 5.90 GHz), favoring the Core 9 in both cases.

Cache configurations also diverge. Both use 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache jumps from 12 MB on the Core 3 to 36 MB on the Core 9. That is a threefold increase in shared cache for the Core 9. The Core 9 also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 does not. Memory bandwidth is listed only for the Core 9 at 89.6 GB/s; the Core 3's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Core 3 uses Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Core 9 uses Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core 9 doubles the lane count and moves to the newer PCIe generation. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. The Core 9 has a recorded part number (SA4Q9), while the Core 3's part number is unknown in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Core 9 273PQE wins every multi-core benchmark in the database. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39190 versus 14948 for the Core 3 100HL, a 61.9% lead. Passmark multithread shows 46107 versus 17586, also a 61.9% gap.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: The Core 9 leads by 61.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core (5532 versus 2110) and by 18.3% in Passmark single-thread (4573 versus 3735). The Passmark gap is the smallest of any benchmark in the head-to-head data.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode. The Core 9 273PQE additionally supports ECC memory, which the Core 3 100HL does not. The Core 9 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 3's bandwidth is not listed.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Core 3 100HL has a 45W TDP, while the Core 9 273PQE has a 125W TDP. The Core 9 draws 80W more under its rated thermal design power.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core 3 100HL uses Iris Xe Graphics 48EU, while the Core 9 273PQE uses UHD Graphics 770. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so relative graphics performance cannot be determined from the recorded data.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Core 3 100HL sits within 1.2% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H and the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V, and within 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U and Intel Core i5-11500. The Core 9 273PQE sits within 1.2% of the AMD EPYC 4465P and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, and within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 9 273PQE dominates every recorded benchmark, but the margins tell a detailed story. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 9 scores 3950 against the Core 3's 1506, a 61.9% lead. The single-core R15 test shows the same 61.9% gap (557 versus 212). Cinebench R20 multi-core repeats the pattern: 16459 versus 6278, again 61.9%. The R20 single-core test shows 2323 versus 886, a 61.9% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers 39190 versus 14948, and R23 single-core delivers 5532 versus 2110, both at 61.9%. The consistency of the 61.9% delta across all six Cinebench tests suggests the clock speed and core count advantages scale uniformly in that benchmark suite.

Passmark results show more variation. Data compression gives the Core 9 a 65.5% lead (585752 versus 202225). Data encryption shows a 59.6% lead (29636 versus 11964). Extended instructions show a 67.8% lead (38743 versus 12463). Prime number finding shows the widest gap at 75.8% (198 versus 48). Floating point math shows a 66.5% lead (125546 versus 42108). Integer math shows a 65.8% lead (164629 versus 56308). The multithread test shows 46107 versus 17586, a 61.9% lead. Physics shows 2754 versus 928, a 66.3% lead. Random string sorting shows the narrowest multi-threaded gap at 56.3% (53167 versus 23223). Single-thread Passmark shows the overall narrowest gap at 18.3% (4573 versus 3735).

The single-thread Passmark result stands out. While every Cinebench single-core test shows a 61.9% lead for the Core 9, Passmark single-thread shows only 18.3%. This indicates that the Core 9's higher 5.90 GHz boost clock helps less in the Passmark single-thread workload than it does in Cinebench. The Core 3's 4.60 GHz boost clock keeps it relatively closer in that specific test. Still, the Core 9 wins there as well, so the overall picture remains unchanged: the Core 9 273PQE is faster in every recorded workload, with single-thread Passmark being its smallest victory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. Core count: 8 cores for the Core 3, 12 cores for the Core 9. Thread count: 12 versus 24. Base clock: 2.10 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. Boost clock: 4.60 GHz versus 5.90 GHz. TDP: 45W versus 125W. Shared L3 cache: 12 MB versus 36 MB. ECC memory support: not supported versus supported. PCIe generation: Gen 4 versus Gen 5. PCIe lane count: 8 CPU lanes versus 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics: Iris Xe Graphics 48EU versus UHD Graphics 770. Memory bandwidth: not recorded for the Core 3, 89.6 GB/s for the Core 9. Part number: unknown versus SA4Q9. Launch MSRP: not recorded for the Core 3, $589 for the Core 9.

Both processors share the Intel Socket 1700, the 10 nm process node, and the dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory support. Both use 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. Both are desktop market segment parts with active production status. Both have locked multipliers. The Core 3 released on 2024-04-07, while the Core 9 releases later on 2026-03-08. The Core 3 lists Raptor Lake as its architecture; the Core 9 lists no architecture field in the database, only the Bartlett Lake codename.