Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive sweep. The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, with no test favoring the Intel Core 3 201E. The margins are substantial, though they vary meaningfully between multi-threaded, single-threaded, and specialized workloads.

The largest gaps appear in arithmetic-heavy workloads. In PassMark floating point math, the Core 9 273PQE scores 125,546 against 33,260 for the Core 3 201E, a delta of 73.5%. Integer math follows closely, with the Core 9 reaching 164,629 versus 43,894, a 73.3% advantage. These are the biggest percentage leads in the entire comparison. Data compression shows a 72% delta (585,752 versus 164,160), while extended instructions deliver a 71.5% gap (38,743 versus 11,035).

The Cinebench suite shows remarkably consistent margins. Across R15, R20, and R23, the multicore tests all land at a 67.8% delta. The Core 9 273PQE records 3,950 in R15 multicore against 1,271, 16,459 versus 5,297 in R20, and 39,190 versus 12,613 in R23. Single-core Cinebench results are nearly identical in relative terms: R15 shows a 67.9% delta (557 versus 179), and R20 and R23 both show 67.8% (2,323 versus 747, and 5,532 versus 1,780). This consistency suggests the performance ratio is stable across rendering workloads regardless of test version.

PassMark multithread shows a 67.8% delta at 46,107 versus 14,839. Random string sorting produces a 66.6% gap (53,167 versus 17,783). Data encryption records a 69.9% delta (29,636 versus 8,931), and find prime numbers shows a 71.2% difference (198 versus 57). Physics simulation gives the smallest multicore-type margin at 58.6% (2,754 versus 1,141).

The narrowest overall gap is in PassMark single-thread performance. The Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 against 3,482 for the Core 3 201E, a delta of 23.9%. This is the only test where the Core 3 comes within a quarter of the Core 9's output. The result indicates that while the Core 9 holds a clear single-core advantage, it is far less dominant there than in heavily threaded or math-oriented workloads. The Core 3's single-thread result of 3,482 also appears as the same value in both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread fields, confirming the consistency of that measurement.

The overall benchmark averages reflect the scale of the separation. The Core 9 273PQE holds an average score of 66,099, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 201E averages 19,056, which lands in the 73rd percentile. That is a 47,043 point difference in average score, and a 20 percentile point separation. The nearest rivals for each part reinforce the positioning. The Core 3 201E sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (19,047), the Intel Core i5-12400F (19,039), the Intel Core i5-1335U (18,982), and the AMD EPYC 7773X (18,979). The Core 9 273PQE, by contrast, is within 1.2% of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus (66,159), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (65,914), the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (66,855), and the AMD EPYC 4465P (66,925). The Core 9 compares against a far higher performance class.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE boosts to 5.90 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201E reaches 4.80 GHz. The Core 9 also has a lower base clock at 3.40 GHz versus 3.60 GHz for the Core 3.

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

A: The Core 9 273PQE leads by 23.9% in PassMark single-thread tests, scoring 4,573 against 3,482. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap is 67.8%, with the Core 9 scoring 5,532 versus 1,780.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 3 201E and the Intel Core 9 273PQE support ECC memory. Both also support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each chip?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has a TDP of 60 watts. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts, which is more than double the Core 3.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, three times the 12 MB shared L3 cache on the Intel Core 3 201E. The per-core L2 cache also differs: 2 MB per core on the Core 9 versus 1.25 MB per core on the Core 3.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Intel Core 9 273PQE includes UHD Graphics 770. The database does not provide benchmark scores for either integrated GPU.

Architecture Differences

Both processors come from the Bartlett Lake codename family and are built on Intel's 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. They share the Intel Socket 1700 platform and both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus. Each has a PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes available from the CPU. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The core configurations differ sharply. The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads, tripling the core count and thread count. The Core 9 also carries a higher boost clock of 5.90 GHz against 4.80 GHz, although the Core 3 has a slightly higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 3.40 GHz.

Cache hierarchies diverge in both per-core and shared capacities. Each core on both chips has 80 KB of L1 cache. The L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core on the Core 3 and 2 MB per core on the Core 9. The shared L3 cache is 12 MB on the Core 3 and 36 MB on the Core 9. Memory bandwidth also scales upward with the Core 9, which records 89.6 GB/s against 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3, a 12.8 GB/s difference.

The integrated graphics differ by model number. The Core 3 201E ships with UHD Graphics 730, and the Core 9 273PQE ships with UHD Graphics 770. Both chips support ECC memory, which is notable for a desktop segment. The die size is reported only for the Core 3 201E at 163 mm²; the database lists no die size for the Core 9 273PQE.

Release dates are separated by just over a year. The Core 3 201E was released on January 12, 2025, and the Core 9 273PQE on March 8, 2026. Both are listed as active production parts. The part numbers are SRVTR for the Core 3 and SA4Q9 for the Core 9.

The memory bus width is identical (dual-channel), so the bandwidth difference comes from memory speed support rather than channel count. Both processors use the same socket, meaning they are physically compatible with the same Intel Socket 1700 motherboards, assuming BIOS support. The 10 nm process node and Intel foundry are shared, so the performance gap cannot be attributed to a process difference. The architectural separation comes down to core count, clock headroom, cache capacity, and the resulting memory bandwidth characteristics.

The Verdict

The data defines two distinct performance tiers. The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the clear choice for workloads that scale with core count, cache size, and maximum clock speed. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with 36 MB of L3 cache and a 5.90 GHz boost clock, produce average benchmark scores more than three times higher than the Core 3 201E. The 93rd percentile ranking versus the 73rd percentile underscores the separation.

The Intel Core 3 201E is a 4-core, 8-thread desktop part with a 4.80 GHz boost clock and 12 MB of L3 cache. It records an average score of 19,056, which places it alongside the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and Intel Core i5-12400F in the database's nearest rival list. Its single-thread PassMark score of 3,482 is within 23.9% of the Core 9, a much smaller gap than the 67.8% to 73.5% deltas seen in multicore and math tests.

For rendering, compression, encryption, and floating point workloads, the Core 9 273PQE delivers margins that are effectively insurmountable. The Cinebench R23 multicore result of 39,190 versus 12,613 is a 67.8% lead. PassMark floating point math shows a 73.5% lead. These are not marginal differences; they represent a different performance class entirely.

The Core 3 201E remains viable for single-thread-sensitive tasks where its 4.80 GHz boost clock and 3,482 PassMark single-thread score are the relevant figures. Its 60 watt TDP is less than half the Core 9's 125 watts, which matters for systems with thermal or power constraints. The database does not include cooler requirements, but the TDP figures alone indicate a substantial thermal separation. The Core 3 also lists a die size of 163 mm², while the Core 9 has no listed die size, so physical dimensions do not factor into the comparison.

The launch MSRP for the Core 3 201E is $134. The launch MSRP for the Core 9 273PQE is $589. The Core 9 costs more than four times as much at launch, and it delivers between 58.6% and 73.5% higher scores depending on the workload. The single-thread gap is the smallest at 23.9%, meaning the price difference buys far more multicore throughput than single-core responsiveness.

The nearest rival data confirms the positioning. The Core 3 201E competes with mid-range mobile and desktop parts around the 19,000 average score mark. The Core 9 273PQE competes with high-end desktop parts around the 66,000 mark, including the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D. The 47,043 point average score gap between the two Intel parts is larger than the entire average score of the Core 3 itself.

Choosing between them depends entirely on workload scale. The Core 9 273PQE is the appropriate part for multi-threaded rendering, data processing, and any task that can use 24 threads and 36 MB of L3 cache. The Core 3 201E is the appropriate part for lighter desktop duties where its lower TDP, lower launch MSRP, and 4.80 GHz boost clock are sufficient. The benchmark data shows no scenario where the Core 3 outperforms the Core 9, but the single-thread margin of 23.9% shows that the Core 3 is comparatively less disadvantaged in lightly threaded work.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | Intel Core 9 273PQE |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Threads | 8 | 24 |

| Base clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.90 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 125 W |

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Die size | 163 mm² | Not listed |

| Release date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-03-08 |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | $589 |

| Part number | SRVTR | SA4Q9 |

Shared specifications include the Intel Socket 1700, 10 nm process node, Intel foundry, Bartlett Lake codename, DDR4/DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, 80 KB L1 cache per core, locked multiplier, desktop market segment, and active production status.