Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core 9 273PE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records 17 head-to-head comparisons between the Intel Core 5 210H and the Intel Core 9 273PE. The Core 9 273PE wins every single test. There are no recorded wins for the Core 5 210H in any of the 17 benchmark categories. This is a complete sweep, but the magnitude of the victory varies significantly depending on the workload.

The most lopsided result appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test. The Core 9 273PE scores 203, while the Core 5 210H scores just 53. That is a 73.9% deficit for the Core 5 210H, the largest margin in the entire dataset. This test is highly sensitive to integer throughput and memory latency, and the gap suggests the Core 9 273PE has a substantial advantage in raw computational density.

Cinebench results show a similar pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PE scores 31288 versus 11830 for the Core 5 210H, a 62.2% difference. The single-core gap in the same test is 4417 versus 1771, a 59.9% deficit. These are enormous margins, indicating the Core 9 273PE is not just faster in parallel workloads but also significantly stronger per thread.

The smallest margin appears in PassMark single-thread performance. The Core 9 273PE scores 3650, while the Core 5 210H scores 3539. That is only a 3% difference. Interestingly, both the `passmark_single_thread` and `passmark_singlethread` entries record identical scores for each processor, confirming the result. This near-parity in single-thread performance stands in sharp contrast to the Cinebench single-core results, where the gap was roughly 60%. The discrepancy likely reflects differences in how the two benchmark suites stress the cores, with Cinebench favoring the higher boost clock and newer architecture more aggressively.

PassMark integer math shows a 55.9% advantage for the Core 9 273PE (139410 versus 61503), while floating-point math shows a 58.2% gap (107884 versus 45057). Data compression tests record a 46.3% difference (405885 versus 217805), and data encryption shows a 46.4% gap (22719 versus 12187). Extended instruction tests result in a 45.7% margin (24630 versus 13370). Random string sorting, which stresses memory access patterns, shows a 48% difference (45098 versus 23451). Physics simulation in PassMark shows a 66.7% gap (3120 versus 1040), the second-largest margin in the whole comparison.

Cinebench R15 and R20 results follow the same trend. In R15 multi-core, the scores are 3153 versus 1757, a 44.3% difference. Single-core R15 shows 445 versus 247, a 44.5% gap. In R20, multi-core scores are 13140 versus 6504, a 50.5% difference, and single-core scores are 1855 versus 918, also 50.5% apart. The Core 9 273PE consistently delivers roughly double the multi-threaded performance of the Core 5 210H across all Cinebench versions.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Core 5 210H uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-H codename, listed as part of the Core 5 generation under the Raptor Lake Refresh. The Core 9 273PE uses Bartlett Lake architecture, a distinct codename with no architecture field specified in the database. Both are built on the same 10 nm process node and manufactured by Intel.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The thread count difference is particularly notable: the Core 9 273PE offers exactly double the threads, which directly explains its dominance in multi-threaded benchmarks. The Core 5 210H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 9 273PE has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The boost clock advantage of 0.90 GHz is significant, and it contributes to the Core 9 273PE's stronger single-thread results in some tests.

Cache layouts also diverge. Both processors have an L1 cache of 80 KB per core and an L2 cache of 2 MB per core. However, the shared L3 cache is drastically different: the Core 5 210H has 12 MB shared, while the Core 9 273PE has 36 MB shared. That is three times the L3 capacity, which matters for workloads with large working sets that need to stay close to the cores. The larger L3 cache on the Core 9 273PE likely plays a role in its strong performance in data compression and random string sorting tests.

Memory support is similar on paper: both support DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. However, the Core 9 273PE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 5 210H has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. The Core 9 273PE also supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 210H does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Core 5 210H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 9 273PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). That doubles the available PCIe lanes for the Core 9 273PE.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. The Core 9 273PE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 5 210H is classified as a mobile processor, while the Core 9 273PE is classified as desktop. Sockets also differ: the Core 5 210H uses Intel BGA 1744, while the Core 9 273PE uses Intel Socket 1700. The TDP ratings reflect the market split: the Core 5 210H is rated at 45 watts, while the Core 9 273PE is rated at 65 watts. The higher TDP on the Core 9 273PE allows it to sustain higher clocks under load, consistent with its benchmark dominance.

Release dates are far apart. The Core 5 210H entered production in December 2024, while the Core 9 273PE is dated March 2026. Both are listed as Active in production status. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows no benchmark categories where the Core 5 210H comes out ahead. Every single recorded test favors the Core 9 273PE. This makes a win-based use-case split impossible from the recorded metrics. However, the size of the margins varies, and that variation is informative.

The Core 5 210H's closest result is in PassMark single-thread performance, where it trails by only 3%. This suggests that for lightly threaded workloads that do not stress cache or memory bandwidth heavily, the Core 5 210H is nearly competitive. The gap widens dramatically in Cinebench single-core tests, where the Core 9 273PE leads by nearly 60%. The difference likely comes from the Core 9 273PE's higher boost clock of 5.70 GHz versus 4.80 GHz, combined with its architectural advantages.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Core 9 273PE is in a different performance class. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 31288 versus 11830, a lead of 19458 points. In PassMark multithread, it scores 36810 versus 18252, a lead of 18558 points. The Core 9 273PE's 24 threads versus 12 threads give it a structural advantage that no amount of clock speed on the Core 5 210H can overcome.

The Core 9 273PE also shows its strongest relative advantage in integer-heavy and physics workloads. The 73.9% lead in find prime numbers and the 66.7% lead in physics indicate that the Core 9 273PE excels at workloads that combine high clock speeds with efficient integer execution. The 62.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core further confirms that fully parallel rendering workloads heavily favor the Core 9 273PE.

For users focused on single-thread responsiveness, the Core 5 210H is not far behind in PassMark terms, but the Cinebench results tell a different story. The Core 9 273PE is simply the faster processor in every measured dimension. The only question is how much faster, and that depends entirely on the workload.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

A: The Core 9 273PE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 210H has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. The Core 9 273PE also supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 210H does not.

Q: How much faster is the Core 9 273PE in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core 9 273PE scores 31288 versus 11830 for the Core 5 210H, a 62.2% advantage.

Q: Are these processors in the same market segment?

A: No, the Core 5 210H is a mobile processor with a 45 watt TDP, while the Core 9 273PE is a desktop processor with a 65 watt TDP.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 9 273PE has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Core 5 210H has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves little room for ambiguity. The Intel Core 9 273PE outperforms the Intel Core 5 210H in every single benchmark category, with 17 wins out of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The average benchmark score for the Core 9 273PE is 49845, while the Core 5 210H averages 24872. That is a 100.3% difference in average score, meaning the Core 9 273PE delivers roughly double the overall performance.

The Core 9 273PE sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 210H sits at the 77th percentile. The Core 9 273PE's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 with an average score of 49796 and a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49394 with a delta of 0.9%, the Intel Core i9-13980HX at 50398 with a delta of -1.1%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370 at 50448 with a delta of -1.2%. The Core 5 210H's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24911 with a delta of -0.2%, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX at 24822 with a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-11850H at 24935 with a delta of -0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F at 24964 with a delta of -0.4%.

For users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput, the Core 9 273PE is the clear choice. Its 24 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 65 watt TDP deliver class-leading results in Cinebench and PassMark multithread tests. For users constrained to mobile platforms, the Core 5 210H offers a 45 watt TDP and Iris Xe Graphics, making it suitable for laptops where power and integrated GPU capability matter more than raw CPU performance. The single-thread PassMark results show only a 3% gap, so for basic desktop responsiveness the Core 5 210H is not far behind. But for any workload that scales across cores, the Core 9 273PE is in a different league entirely.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 210H | Intel Core 9 273PE |

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

| Cores | 8 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.70 GHz |

| TDP | 45 watts | 65 watts |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-H | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB shared | 36 MB shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 8 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 48EU | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | December 2024 | March 2026 |

| Launch MSRP | $342 | $549 |

| Part Number | SRQ6RQ5MN | SA4QD |