Intel Core 3 N350 vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

The Intel Core 3 N350 and Intel Core 9 273PQE occupy very different positions in the database. The Core 3 N350 is a low-power mobile processor aimed at basic computing, while the Core 9 273PQE is a high-core-count desktop part built for demanding workloads. The recorded benchmark results show a complete performance sweep in favor of the Core 9 273PQE, with every single test returning a win for the larger processor.

The data shows a dominant performance profile for the Core 9 273PQE. Across all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, it records a win, leaving the Core 3 N350 with zero victories. The performance gap is substantial in every category. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PQE scores 39190 against the Core 3 N350's 6274, a delta of -84 percent. The single-core result in the same test shows a similar pattern: 5532 versus 885, also -84 percent. The Core 9 273PQE's advantage is consistent across all Cinebench versions, including R15 and R20, where every result also shows a -84 percent delta.

The Passmark suite confirms this trend. In data compression, the Core 9 273PQE scores 585752 compared to 80444 for the Core 3 N350, a delta of -86.3 percent. The integer math test shows 164629 versus 27669, a -83.2 percent delta. Floating point math results in 125546 against 17781, a -85.8 percent gap. The multithread test delivers 46107 versus 7382, a -84 percent delta. Extended instructions show 38743 versus 3981, a -89.7 percent delta. The largest relative gap appears in the find prime numbers test, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 198 versus 20, a -89.9 percent delta.

The closest contest in the entire dataset is the Passmark single-thread test. Here, the Core 9 273PQE scores 4573 against the Core 3 N350's 1974, a -56.8 percent delta. While still a decisive win, this is the narrowest margin recorded. The data encryption test shows 29636 versus 5693, a -80.8 percent delta, while random string sorting shows 53167 versus 10102, a -81 percent delta. The physics test delivers 2754 versus 446, a -83.8 percent delta.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data leaves no ambiguity about relative performance. The Core 9 273PQE wins all 17 recorded comparisons. The smallest advantage is in single-threaded Passmark tests, where the Core 9 273PQE leads by -56.8 percent. The largest advantage is in prime number finding, where it leads by -89.9 percent.

Cinebench results are remarkably uniform. Every version, from R15 to R23, in both multi-core and single-core modes, shows a -84 percent delta in favor of the Core 9 273PQE. This consistency suggests the architectural advantage is not workload-specific but fundamental. The Core 9 273PQE scores 3950 in R15 multi-core versus 632 for the Core 3 N350. In R15 single-core, it scores 557 versus 89. R20 multi-core sees 16459 versus 2635, and R20 single-core sees 2323 versus 371.

Passmark results show a wider spread in deltas. The compression test shows -86.3 percent, encryption shows -80.8 percent, and extended instructions show -89.7 percent. Integer math shows -83.2 percent, floating point shows -85.8 percent, and multithread shows -84 percent. The physics test shows -83.8 percent, and random string sorting shows -81 percent. The two single-thread Passmark entries, listed under slightly different test names, both show -56.8 percent.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins every recorded benchmark category. There is no test in the database where the Core 3 N350 records a higher score. This means the use-case split is entirely one-sided based on the available data.

For heavily threaded workloads, the Core 9 273PQE's advantage is pronounced. The multithread Passmark score of 46107 dwarfs the 7382 of the Core 3 N350. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 39190 versus 6274 reinforces this. The Core 9 273PQE also leads in data-heavy operations, with compression and encryption scores of 585752 and 29636 respectively, against 80444 and 5693.

For single-threaded tasks, the Core 9 273PQE still leads, but by a smaller margin. The Passmark single-thread score of 4573 versus 1974 represents the narrowest gap in the dataset. The Cinebench R23 single-core result of 5532 versus 885 shows a wider relative gap, but the absolute difference remains smaller than in multi-core tests.

The Core 3 N350 does not win any category. Its lower core count, thread count, and clock speeds place it behind in every measured workload. The data indicates it is suited for lighter tasks, but the database contains no benchmarks where it outperforms the Core 9 273PQE.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in architecture and design goals. The Core 3 N350 uses the Twin Lake architecture, also listed under the codename Twin Lake, and belongs to the Core 3 generation based on Alder Lake-N. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture, with the codename Bartlett Lake, and belongs to the Core 9 generation.

Process node information is identical: both are listed at 10 nm and fabricated by Intel. However, the core configurations diverge sharply. The Core 3 N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The latter supports simultaneous multithreading, which doubles its thread count.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Core 3 N350 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE also has a much higher power envelope, with a TDP of 125 watts against 7 watts for the Core 3 N350.

Cache configurations are markedly different. The Core 3 N350 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PQE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache allocation is particularly notable: per-core versus shared.

Memory support also differs. The Core 3 N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, with a single-channel memory bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel memory bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PQE also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 N350 does not.

PCIe capabilities diverge as well. The Core 3 N350 uses PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the Core 9 273PQE uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Both processors integrate UHD Graphics 770, but the Core 3 N350 targets the mobile segment while the Core 9 273PQE targets desktop. They also use different sockets: Intel BGA 1264 for the Core 3 N350 and Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 9 273PQE.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 3 N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core 9 273PQE scores 39190, while the Core 3 N350 scores 6274. The delta is -84 percent in favor of the Core 9 273PQE.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 3 N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5. The Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has a boost clock of 5.90 GHz, compared to 3.90 GHz for the Core 3 N350.

Q: Is ECC memory supported by either processor?

A: The Core 9 273PQE supports ECC memory. The Core 3 N350 does not.

Q: How do the processors compare in single-threaded Passmark performance?

A: The Core 9 273PQE scores 4573, while the Core 3 N350 scores 1974. This represents a -56.8 percent delta, the smallest margin in the head-to-head data.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear separation between these two processors. The Core 9 273PQE is the superior performer in every measured benchmark, with a 100 percent win rate across all 17 head-to-head tests. Its average benchmark score of 66099 places it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 N350 averages 9903 and sits at the 66th percentile.

The Core 9 273PQE's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus at -0.1 percent, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 0.3 percent, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at -1.1 percent. The Core 3 N350's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-3770 at 2 percent, the Intel Core i5-1035G1 at 2.3 percent, the AMD EPYC 7F52 at -2.5 percent, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 at -3.2 percent.

The Core 9 273PQE is designed for high-performance desktop workloads, with 24 threads, dual-channel memory at 89.6 GB/s, PCIe Gen 5 support, and a 36 MB L3 cache. The Core 3 N350 is a low-power mobile part with 8 threads, single-channel memory at 38.4 GB/s, PCIe Gen 3 support, and a 6 MB L3 cache. The TDP difference of 125 watts versus 7 watts reflects these divergent design targets.

Based on the data, the Core 9 273PQE is the appropriate choice for users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput and single-thread responsiveness. The Core 3 N350 serves a different role, suited for low-power environments where performance expectations are modest. The benchmark results offer no scenario where the Core 3 N350 outperforms the Core 9 273PQE.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in core count: 8 cores for the Core 3 N350 and 12 cores for the Core 9 273PQE. Thread counts are 8 and 24 respectively. Base clocks are 0.10 GHz and 3.40 GHz, with boost clocks of 3.90 GHz and 5.90 GHz. TDP is 7 watts versus 125 watts.

Cache configurations differ in L1, L2, and L3. The Core 3 N350 has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core 9 273PQE has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. Memory bus width differs: single-channel versus dual-channel, with bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. ECC support is absent on the Core 3 N350 and present on the Core 9 273PQE.

PCIe support differs with Gen 3 and 9 lanes on the Core 3 N350, versus Gen 5 and 16 lanes on the Core 9 273PQE. Sockets are Intel BGA 1264 versus Intel Socket 1700. Market segments are mobile versus desktop. Release dates are 2025-01-06 for the Core 3 N350 and 2026-03-08 for the Core 9 273PQE. The Core 9 273PQE has a launch MSRP of $589. The integrated graphics are the same UHD Graphics 770 on both parts.