Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core 9 273PTE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark tests, while the Intel Core 3 305 wins only 2. The Core 9's advantage is widespread across multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PTE scores 20,445 versus the Core 3 305's 13,123, a 35.8% advantage. The same 35.8% delta appears in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Is there any test where the Core 3 305 beats the Core 9 273PTE?

A: Yes, in PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests, the Core 3 305 scores 3,977 versus 3,433 for the Core 9 273PTE, a 15.8% lead for the smaller chip.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads, giving it 4 times the thread count of the Core 3.

Q: How does the integrated graphics differ between the two?

A: The Core 3 305 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe), while the Core 9 273PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 3's graphics are newer generation, but the Core 9's desktop positioning suggests different usage patterns.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each processor in the database?

A: The Core 3 305 sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs tracked, while the Core 9 273PTE ranks at the 82nd percentile. The Core 9 also has a substantially higher average benchmark score: 31,143 versus 18,302.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design families. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is manufactured on a 10 nm node. Both are produced by Intel, but the process difference is significant: the Core 3 uses a much more advanced manufacturing node.

Core configuration shows the most dramatic architectural split. The Core 3 305 is a 6-core, 6-thread part, meaning no hyperthreading is present. The Core 9 273PTE doubles the core count to 12 and quadruples the thread count to 24, indicating simultaneous multithreading is enabled. This thread advantage directly explains the Core 9's dominance in heavily parallel workloads.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Core 3 305 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PTE specifies 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9's per-core L2 allocation scales with its larger core count, and its L3 pool is 6 times the size of the Core 3's.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 also supports ECC memory, which the Core 3 does not.

PCIe capability differs substantially. The Core 3 305 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes, while the Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU-only lanes. The Core 9's interface supports both a newer generation and more than double the lane count.

Socket and market positioning are completely different. The Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket, and targets the Mobile segment. The Core 9 273PTE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket, and targets the Desktop segment. This explains the TDP difference: 15 watts for the Core 3 versus 45 watts for the Core 9.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear pattern of Core 9 273PTE dominance, but the magnitude varies significantly by workload type.

Cinebench family: Across all three Cinebench versions, the Core 9 leads by nearly identical margins. In R15 multi-core, the Core 9 scores 2,060 versus 1,322, a 35.8% lead. Single-core R15 shows 290 versus 186, a 35.9% gap. R20 multi-core delivers 8,586 versus 5,511 (35.8%), and R20 single-core gives 1,212 versus 777 (35.9%). R23 multi-core shows 20,445 versus 13,123 (35.8%), with single-core at 2,886 versus 1,852 (35.8%). These consistent deltas suggest the Core 9's architectural efficiency scales evenly across both multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering tasks.

PassMark integer math: This is the Core 9's largest victory. It scores 82,411 versus 32,295, a 60.8% advantage. The Core 9's 24 threads provide a massive parallel throughput advantage for integer operations.

PassMark data compression: The Core 9 scores 258,704 versus 146,857, a 43.2% lead. Compression workloads benefit heavily from the Core 9's larger thread pool and bigger L3 cache.

PassMark random string sorting: The Core 9 leads 28,973 versus 17,623, a 39.2% margin. This memory-intensive workload responds to the dual-channel memory bus and larger cache.

PassMark multi-thread: The Core 9 scores 24,054 versus 15,439, a 35.8% gap, consistent with the Cinebench multi-core results.

PassMark floating point math: The Core 9 leads 60,673 versus 42,284, a 30.3% advantage.

PassMark data encryption: The Core 9 wins 14,253 versus 11,019, a 22.7% gap. Encryption workloads show a smaller but still decisive lead.

PassMark extended instructions: The Core 9 scores 15,952 versus 13,543, a 15.1% margin, its smallest multi-threaded win.

PassMark find prime numbers: The Core 9 leads 142 versus 115, a 19% advantage.

PassMark physics: The Core 9 scores 1,917 versus 1,233, a 35.7% lead.

PassMark single-thread: The Core 3 305 wins here, scoring 3,977 versus 3,433, a 15.8% advantage. This is the only category where the Core 3 shows superiority, and it repeats in the duplicate singlethread entry.

The overall win count is 15 for the Core 9 and 2 for the Core 3, with both Core 3 wins coming from the same single-threaded PassMark test.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category.

• Cores: 6 (Core 3) versus 12 (Core 9)
• Threads: 6 versus 24
• Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 1.40 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus 5.50 GHz
• TDP: 15 W versus 45 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Wildcat Lake versus Bartlett Lake
• Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm
• L1 cache: 192 KB versus 80 KB (per core)
• L2 cache: 2.5 MB versus 2 MB (per core)
• L3 cache: 6 MB (shared) versus 36 MB (shared)
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5
• Memory bus: Single-channel versus Dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s
• ECC memory: Not supported versus Supported
• PCIe: Gen 4, 6 Lanes versus Gen 5, 16 Lanes
• Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) versus UHD Graphics 730
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release date: 2026-04-15 versus 2026-03-08
• Launch MSRP: $309 versus $549

The Core 3's advantages include a smaller process node, higher base clock, newer integrated graphics, and a later release date. The Core 9 dominates in core count, threads, boost clock, cache capacity, memory bandwidth, PCIe capability, and ECC support.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two processors aimed at completely different use cases. The Intel Core 9 273PTE is the clear performance winner in 15 of 17 benchmark comparisons, with leads ranging from 15.1% to 60.8%. Its 24 threads, 36 MB L3 cache, and dual-channel memory bus deliver consistent multi-threaded dominance. The Core 9 also holds a higher percentile ranking (82nd versus 72nd) and a substantially higher average benchmark score (31,143 versus 18,302).

The Intel Core 3 305 is not without merit. Its 3 nm process node and higher base clock contribute to a 15.8% single-threaded PassMark win. It also uses dramatically less power (15 W versus 45 W), which aligns with its mobile BGA 1516 socket and Mobile market segment.

The nearest rivals in the database reinforce this split. The Core 3 305 sits within 0.4% of the Intel Core i3-14100, Intel Core 5 330, Intel Core 7 360, and AMD Ryzen 5 2600E. The Core 9 273PTE sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core i7-12700F, AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS, Intel Core i7-13700TE, and Intel Core i7-12650HX. These comparison groups confirm that the Core 3 competes in the entry-to-mid mobile tier, while the Core 9 competes in the desktop high-performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core 3 305: The data shows this processor wins only in single-threaded PassMark tests, scoring 3,977 versus 3,433. Its higher base clock of 1.50 GHz and 3 nm process node likely contribute to this result. The Core 3's 15 W TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained mobile platforms, and its Intel BGA 1516 socket confirms this mobile intent. The newer Xe3 integrated graphics and LPDDR5X memory support also position it for portable systems where power efficiency and graphics capability matter more than raw compute throughput.

Intel Core 9 273PTE: This processor wins everywhere else. Its largest margins come from integer math (60.8% ahead) and data compression (43.2% ahead), where the 24-thread configuration shines. The 35.8% consistent lead across all Cinebench multi-core tests indicates reliable scaling in rendering applications. The 36 MB L3 cache and dual-channel 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth support heavy data workloads. The Core 9's Gen 5 PCIe with 16 lanes provides expansion headroom for discrete GPUs and NVMe storage, aligning with its Desktop market segment. ECC memory support adds reliability for compute-focused builds. The 45 W TDP and Socket 1700 confirm this is a desktop-class processor designed for sustained high performance rather than battery efficiency.