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

Intel Core 3 100UL and Intel Core 9 273PQE are both desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, but they occupy very different positions in the product stack. The Core 3 100UL is a Raptor Lake-PS part with 6 cores and 8 threads, a 1.20 GHz base clock, and a 4.50 GHz boost clock. The Core 9 273PQE is a Bartlett Lake part with 12 cores and 24 threads, a 3.40 GHz base clock, and a 5.90 GHz boost clock. The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark records between these two, so the comparison relies on the recorded scores for the Core 9 273PQE and the architectural specifications for both.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins in every measured workload category, according to the recorded data. Its multithreaded performance is decisive: the Cinebench R23 multicore score is 39190, the Cinebench R20 multicore score is 16459, and the Cinebench R15 multicore score is 3950. These results place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 66099. The Core 3 100UL has no benchmark scores recorded, so its wins cannot be quantified from the data.

The Core 3 100UL does have a meaningful advantage in power envelope. Its TDP is 15 watts, while the Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts. For systems where heat output and cooling capacity are constrained, the Core 3 100UL is the only viable option between the two. It also uses the same dual-channel memory interface and supports both DDR4 and DDR5, so memory flexibility is preserved even at the lower power level.

Single-threaded performance is another area where the Core 9 273PQE shows strength. The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 5532, the Cinebench R20 single-core score is 2323, and the Cinebench R15 single-core score is 557. The PassMark single-thread score is 4573. These scores indicate that the higher boost clock, 5.90 GHz, contributes to responsive single-threaded workloads. The Core 3 100UL, with a 4.50 GHz boost clock, cannot match this from the available data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Core 3 100UL uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, and belongs to the Core 3 generation. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 9 generation. Both are built on a 10 nm process node by Intel, and both use the Intel Socket 1700.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads, indicating a configuration with some cores lacking hyper-threading. The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, meaning every core supports two threads. This doubles the thread count relative to the core count, which is a major factor in its multicore benchmark results.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 3 100UL has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PQE has the same 80 KB L1 per core, but 2 MB of L2 per core and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 cache, 36 MB versus 10 MB, gives the Core 9 273PQE more capacity for frequently accessed data across its 12 cores.

PCIe capabilities are different. The Core 3 100UL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Core 9 273PQE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. This doubles the lane count and advances the generation, which matters for storage and expansion bandwidth.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 100UL includes UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Core 9 273PQE includes UHD Graphics 770. Both provide display output without a discrete GPU, but the graphics execution unit counts are not listed for either part in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database has no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors. The wins tally is 0 for both. However, the Core 9 273PQE has a full set of benchmark scores, while the Core 3 100UL has none. The comparison therefore relies on the Core 9 273PQE's absolute scores and its percentile rank.

The Core 9 273PQE's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39190 is a strong result. Its nearest rival in the database is the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66159, a delta of -0.1 percent, meaning the Core 9 273PQE is essentially tied with it. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D has an average score of 65914, a delta of 0.3 percent, meaning the Core 9 273PQE is 0.3 percent ahead. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average score of 66855, a delta of -1.1 percent, meaning the Core 9 273PQE is 1.1 percent behind. The AMD EPYC 4465P has an average score of 66925, a delta of -1.2 percent, meaning the Core 9 273PQE is 1.2 percent behind.

The single-thread scores also place well. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5532 and the PassMark single-thread score of 4573 are consistent with a high-boost design. The 93rd percentile rank across all CPUs indicates that the Core 9 273PQE outperforms the vast majority of recorded processors in the database.

The Core 3 100UL has a 50th percentile rank, which is the median for all CPUs. Without benchmark scores, its actual performance cannot be compared numerically. The architectural differences, particularly the core count and clock speeds, suggest a large gap, but the data does not provide a direct score for the Core 3 100UL.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear separation between these two processors. The Core 9 273PQE delivers high multicore throughput with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39190, a Cinebench R20 multicore score of 16459, and a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 3950. Its PassMark multithread score of 46107 and integer math score of 164629 further confirm its strength in parallel workloads. It also has a high single-thread capability, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5532 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4573.

The Core 3 100UL offers a low-power alternative at 15 watts TDP, but it has no recorded benchmark scores to establish its performance level. Its 6 cores and 8 threads, along with a 10 MB L3 cache, suggest it is intended for basic desktop tasks. The 50th percentile rank places it at the median of all CPUs, but that rank is not tied to any specific score in the database.

Users who need maximum compute throughput should select the Core 9 273PQE. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, 36 MB L3 cache, and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes provide a robust platform for demanding applications. Users who require minimal power draw, such as in compact or passively cooled systems, should consider the Core 3 100UL, as its 15 watt TDP is drastically lower than the 125 watt TDP of the Core 9 273PQE.

The Core 9 273PQE also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 100UL does not. This makes the Core 9 273PQE suitable for reliability-sensitive workloads. The Core 9 273PQE has a listed memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 3 100UL has no bandwidth figure recorded.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a boost clock of 5.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 3 100UL has 10 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 3 100UL and the Intel Core 9 273PQE support DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: Does the Intel Core 9 273PQE support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 100UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL has a TDP of 15 watts. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, as recorded in the database.

• Cores: 6 (Core 3 100UL) versus 12 (Core 9 273PQE)
• Threads: 8 (Core 3 100UL) versus 24 (Core 9 273PQE)
• Base clock: 1.20 GHz (Core 3 100UL) versus 3.40 GHz (Core 9 273PQE)
• Boost clock: 4.50 GHz (Core 3 100UL) versus 5.90 GHz (Core 9 273PQE)
• TDP: 15 W (Core 3 100UL) versus 125 W (Core 9 273PQE)
• Architecture: Raptor Lake (Core 3 100UL) versus Bartlett Lake (Core 9 273PQE)
• Codename: Raptor Lake-PS (Core 3 100UL) versus Bartlett Lake (Core 9 273PQE)
• Generation: Core 3 (Raptor Lake-PS) versus Core 9 (Bartlett Lake)
• L2 cache per core: 1.25 MB (Core 3 100UL) versus 2 MB (Core 9 273PQE)
• L3 cache: 10 MB shared (Core 3 100UL) versus 36 MB shared (Core 9 273PQE)
• Memory bandwidth: not recorded (Core 3 100UL) versus 89.6 GB/s (Core 9 273PQE)
• ECC memory support: false (Core 3 100UL) versus true (Core 9 273PQE)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 8 lanes CPU (Core 3 100UL) versus Gen 5, 16 lanes CPU (Core 9 273PQE)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 64EU (Core 3 100UL) versus UHD Graphics 770 (Core 9 273PQE)
• Percentile vs all CPUs: 50th (Core 3 100UL) versus 93rd (Core 9 273PQE)
• Average benchmark score: 0 (Core 3 100UL) versus 66099 (Core 9 273PQE)
• Launch MSRP: not recorded (Core 3 100UL) versus $589 (Core 9 273PQE)
• Part number: unknown (Core 3 100UL) versus SA4Q9 (Core 9 273PQE)

Both processors are active in production, use the Intel Socket 1700, are built on a 10 nm process by Intel, and are not multiplier unlocked. Both support dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory.