Intel Core 5 130UL vs Intel Core 9 273PTE Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two desktop processors. The Intel Core 9 273PTE holds a clear advantage in every benchmark category where measurements exist, while the Intel Core 5 130UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Core 9 273PTE sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 5 130UL sits at the 50th percentile. The Core 9 273PTE delivers an average benchmark score of 31,143, placing it within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-12700F and AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS, and within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-13700TE. The Core 5 130UL shows a 0 average benchmark score with no nearest rivals recorded, indicating it has not been subjected to the same benchmark suite. Users requiring maximum compute throughput should select the Core 9 273PTE based on its substantial core, thread, cache, and clock advantages. The Core 5 130UL remains an option only where its lower power envelope and integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU are prioritized over raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 130UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-PS codename, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The Intel Core 9 273PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename with a 10 nm process node as well, though its architecture field is not recorded in the database. Both processors use the Intel Socket 1700 and support DDR4 and DDR5 memory through dual-channel memory buses.

The Core 5 130UL provides 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 9 273PTE provides 12 cores and 24 threads. Thread counts differ by a factor of two, indicating that the Core 9 273PTE likely enables Hyper-Threading on all cores, whereas the Core 5 130UL appears to have a more limited threading configuration across its 10 cores. The base clock of the Core 5 130UL is 1.60 GHz, while the Core 9 273PTE has a lower base clock of 1.40 GHz. The boost clock reverses this relationship: the Core 5 130UL reaches 4.70 GHz, while the Core 9 273PTE boosts to 5.50 GHz, a 0.80 GHz advantage.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Both processors share an L1 cache of 80 KB per core. The L2 cache on the Core 5 130UL is 1.25 MB per core, while the Core 9 273PTE has 2 MB per core, a 60% larger per-core allocation. The L3 cache shows the largest disparity: the Core 5 130UL has 12 MB shared, while the Core 9 273PTE has 36 MB shared, triple the capacity. This larger cache pool directly benefits workloads that repeatedly access working sets beyond the smaller L3 size.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 130UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the Core 9 273PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 9 273PTE adds ECC memory support, a feature absent on the Core 5 130UL. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the Core 5 130UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), doubling both the generation and lane count. The memory bandwidth for the Core 9 273PTE is recorded at 89.6 GB/s, while no equivalent figure exists for the Core 5 130UL.

Where Each One Wins

Benchmark results indicate the Core 9 273PTE wins in all measured categories. The Cinebench suite shows consistent multi-core superiority. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 9 273PTE scores 2,060 points. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it reaches 8,586 points. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it produces 20,445 points. Single-core results follow: Cinebench R15 single-core at 290, Cinebench R20 single-core at 1,212, and Cinebench R23 single-core at 2,886.

PassMark tests confirm the same pattern. The Core 9 273PTE scores 82,411 in integer math, 60,673 in floating point math, 25,8704 in data compression, 14,253 in data encryption, 15,952 in extended instructions, 142 in find prime numbers, 24,054 in multithread, 1,917 in physics, 28,973 in random string sorting, and 3,433 in both single-thread tests. These figures span a wide range of workload types, from arithmetic to memory-intensive sorting.

The Core 5 130UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its wins are therefore structural rather than measured. It carries a 15 W TDP versus the Core 9 273PTE's 45 W TDP, indicating a lower thermal design power suited to more constrained cooling environments. Its integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU may be more capable for light graphics tasks than the UHD Graphics 730, though no benchmark data confirms this. Its lower boost clock of 4.70 GHz versus 5.50 GHz suggests reduced peak frequency demands.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 20,445, its Cinebench R20 multi-core score is 8,586, and its Cinebench R15 multi-core score is 2,060. The Core 5 130UL has no recorded multi-core benchmark scores.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Core 5 130UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads, providing 2 additional cores and 12 additional threads.

Q: What is the L3 cache difference?

A: The Core 5 130UL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PTE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, three times larger.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 130UL does not.

Q: What PCIe capabilities does each processor offer?

A: The Core 5 130UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The Core 9 273PTE provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What is the average benchmark score of the Core 9 273PTE?

A: The average benchmark score is 31,143, placing it at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs. It sits within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-12700F and AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS, and within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-13700TE.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries comparing these two processors directly. However, the Core 9 273PTE's individual benchmark scores provide the full picture. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20,445 indicates strong multi-threaded rendering capability. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,886 indicates robust single-thread responsiveness. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,433 reinforces this.

The Core 5 130UL has zero recorded benchmark scores, so no direct comparison of specific test results is possible. The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PTE provide context. The Intel Core i7-12700F averages 31,081, a delta of 0.2% above the Core 9 273PTE. The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS averages 31,074, also 0.2% above. The Intel Core i7-13700TE averages 31,028, 0.4% above. The Intel Core i7-12650HX averages 31,290, 0.5% below. These deltas are small, indicating the Core 9 273PTE performs within a narrow band around these established processors.

The largest wins for the Core 9 273PTE come from its multi-threaded and cache-sensitive workloads. The PassMark data compression score of 258,704 and the integer math score of 82,411 both benefit from the 24 threads and 36 MB L3 cache. The floating point math score of 60,673 similarly leverages the wider execution resources. The physics score of 1,917 and the extended instructions score of 15,952 round out the compute profile.

The Core 5 130UL's advantages are limited to its lower TDP of 15 W versus 45 W, its slightly higher base clock of 1.60 GHz versus 1.40 GHz, and its Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The base clock advantage is minor compared to the Core 9 273PTE's boost clock advantage of 5.50 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. The integrated graphics difference cannot be quantified from the database, as no graphics benchmarks are recorded for either processor.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: Core 5 130UL has 10 cores; Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores.
• Threads: Core 5 130UL has 12 threads; Core 9 273PTE has 24 threads.
• Base Clock: Core 5 130UL runs at 1.60 GHz; Core 9 273PTE runs at 1.40 GHz.
• Boost Clock: Core 5 130UL boosts to 4.70 GHz; Core 9 273PTE boosts to 5.50 GHz.
• TDP: Core 5 130UL has a 15 W TDP; Core 9 273PTE has a 45 W TDP.
• Architecture: Core 5 130UL uses Raptor Lake; Core 9 273PTE has no recorded architecture.
• Codename: Core 5 130UL uses Raptor Lake-PS; Core 9 273PTE uses Bartlett Lake.
• L2 Cache: Core 5 130UL has 1.25 MB per core; Core 9 273PTE has 2 MB per core.
• L3 Cache: Core 5 130UL has 12 MB shared; Core 9 273PTE has 36 MB shared.
• Memory Bandwidth: Core 9 273PTE records 89.6 GB/s; no figure for Core 5 130UL.
• ECC Memory: Core 5 130UL does not support ECC; Core 9 273PTE supports ECC.
• PCIe: Core 5 130UL uses Gen 4, 8 lanes; Core 9 273PTE uses Gen 5, 16 lanes.
• Integrated Graphics: Core 5 130UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU; Core 9 273PTE uses UHD Graphics 730.
• Release Date: Core 5 130UL released on 2024-04-07; Core 9 273PTE released on 2026-03-08.
• Launch MSRP: Core 9 273PTE has a launch MSRP of $549; Core 5 130UL has no recorded launch MSRP.
• Part Number: Core 9 273PTE has part number SA4QJ; Core 5 130UL has unknown part number.

Both processors share the same process node (10 nm), foundry (Intel), socket (Intel Socket 1700), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (Dual-channel), market segment (Desktop), production status (Active), and multiplier unlock status (locked). Both have L1 cache of 80 KB per core. The Core 9 273PTE's release date is later by approximately two years, and its launch MSRP of $549 reflects its higher positioning. The data confirms the Core 9 273PTE as the more capable processor across every measured dimension.