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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a strikingly one-sided picture. Across the seventeen recorded comparisons, the Intel Core 9 273PTE claims fifteen wins, while the Intel Core 5 210H manages only two, both in the same PassMark single-thread test. The margins, however, vary dramatically by workload.

The largest single gap appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 142 against the Core 5 210H's 53. That is a 62.7% deficit for the Core 5, the widest margin in the entire dataset. This test is highly sensitive to integer throughput and thread scaling, and the Core 9's additional cores and threads show clearly here.

Cinebench results follow a similar pattern. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 9 273PTE delivers 20445 points versus 11830 for the Core 5 210H, a 42.1% advantage. The R23 single-core test also favors the Core 9, with 2886 points against 1771, a 38.6% lead. Interestingly, the single-core gap is nearly as large as the multicore gap, suggesting the Core 9 273PTE is not merely winning through core count but through higher per-thread performance as well, likely tied to its 5.50 GHz boost clock.

Cinebench R20 shows a 24.2% multicore win for the Core 9 273PTE (8586 versus 6504) and a 24.3% single-core win (1212 versus 918). Cinebench R15 narrows the gap somewhat: the Core 9 leads by 14.7% in multicore (2060 versus 1757) and 14.8% in single-core (290 versus 247). The pattern across Cinebench generations is consistent: the Core 9 wins, but the percentage gap grows as the workload becomes more demanding and longer-running.

PassMark's integer math test shows the Core 9 273PTE at 82411 against 61503 for the Core 5 210H, a 25.4% lead. Floating point math follows closely, with 60673 versus 45057, a 25.7% edge. The multithread benchmark gives the Core 9 a 24.1% advantage (24054 versus 18252). Physics simulation is another standout: 1917 versus 1040, a 45.7% gap that reflects the Core 9's superior thread handling in heavily parallel physics workloads.

The Core 5 210H's only victories come in PassMark's single-thread test, where it scores 3539 against the Core 9's 3433. That is a slim 3.1% margin, and it appears twice in the dataset under two test names that record identical scores. This suggests the Core 5 210H has a slight edge in certain lightly threaded tasks, likely due to its higher base clock of 2.20 GHz compared to the Core 9's 1.40 GHz, even though the Core 9 boosts higher.

Data compression shows the Core 9 ahead by 15.8% (258704 versus 217805), while data encryption gives it a 14.5% lead (14253 versus 12187). Extended instructions favor the Core 9 by 16.2% (15952 versus 13370), and random string sorting by 19.1% (28973 versus 23451). These are moderate but consistent advantages across memory and I/O sensitive workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in their underlying design. The Intel Core 5 210H uses Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-H, part of the Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. The Intel Core 9 273PTE is built on Bartlett Lake, a newer design with no explicit architecture field recorded, and carries the generation label Core 9 (Bartlett Lake).

Both processors are manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node and produced by Intel's own foundry. The Core 5 210H offers 8 cores and 12 threads, while the Core 9 273PTE provides 12 cores and 24 threads. That is a 50% increase in core count and a 100% increase in thread count, which explains much of the multicore performance gap.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Both use 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache, however, is three times larger on the Core 9 273PTE: 36 MB versus 12 MB on the Core 5 210H. This additional cache likely benefits workloads with large working sets, such as data compression and encryption, where the Core 9 shows consistent 14-16% leads.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The Core 5 210H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 9 273PTE has a lower base clock of 1.40 GHz but a higher boost of 5.50 GHz. The lower base clock on the Core 9 likely contributes to its single-thread PassMark deficit, while the higher boost clock helps it win most other benchmarks despite starting from a lower idle frequency.

Memory support is similar on paper: both support DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. The Core 9 273PTE, however, records a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 5 210H has no bandwidth figure recorded. The Core 9 also supports ECC memory, which the Core 5 does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Core 9 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This doubles the CPU-attached PCIe lane count on the Core 9, which may matter for storage or expansion in desktop configurations.

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics 48EU, while the Core 9 273PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 5's integrated GPU is typically associated with mobile platforms, while the Core 9's UHD 730 is a desktop-oriented solution. Socket compatibility also separates them: the Core 5 210H uses Intel BGA 1744, a soldered mobile socket, while the Core 9 273PTE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. The market segments confirm this split: the Core 5 is listed as Mobile, while the Core 9 is listed as Desktop.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PTE dominates almost every measured category. Its largest wins come in prime number finding (62.7% ahead), physics simulation (45.7% ahead), and Cinebench R23 multicore (42.1% ahead). These are workloads that scale well with additional cores and threads, and the Core 9's 12 cores and 24 threads give it a structural advantage that the Core 5 cannot overcome.

Cinebench R23 single-core also goes to the Core 9 by a large 38.6% margin, which is notable because single-core performance usually depends more on clock speed and microarchitecture than on core count. The Core 9's 5.50 GHz boost clock appears to be the decisive factor here, overpowering the Core 5's higher 2.20 GHz base clock.

The Core 5 210H wins only the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 3.1% higher than the Core 9. This is a narrow margin, and it appears in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries, which record identical scores of 3539 and 3433 respectively. The Core 5's higher base clock likely gives it an advantage in short, light workloads that do not trigger the Core 9's boost behavior.

For users running heavily parallel tasks, the data is unambiguous: the Core 9 273PTE is the stronger processor by margins ranging from 14.5% to 62.7%. For users whose workloads are dominated by single-threaded operations at moderate frequencies, the Core 5 210H offers a small but measurable edge.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

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

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The Core 9 273PTE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, three times the 12 MB on the Core 5 210H.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded performance?

A: The Core 5 210H wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 3539 versus 3433, a 3.1% margin. However, the Core 9 273PTE wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 2886 versus 1771, a 38.6% lead.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The PassMark find prime numbers test shows the largest gap, with the Core 9 273PTE scoring 142 against the Core 5 210H's 53, a 62.7% difference.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 210H does not.

Q: What sockets do these processors use?

A: The Core 5 210H uses Intel BGA 1744, while the Core 9 273PTE uses Intel Socket 1700.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 9 273PTE holds the overall advantage in 15 of 17 benchmark comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 31143 against the Core 5 210H's 24872. That is a 25.2% higher average score, and the Core 9 sits at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs compared to the Core 5's 77th percentile.

The Core 9 273PTE's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i7-12700F (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS (0.2% ahead), and the Intel Core i7-13700TE (0.4% ahead), placing it in a competitive desktop performance tier. The Core 5 210H, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core i7-13620H (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (0.2% ahead), and the Intel Core i7-11850H (0.3% behind), positioning it as a mid-range mobile processor.

Users whose tasks involve heavy multithreading, large cache working sets, or ECC memory requirements should choose the Core 9 273PTE. The data shows it leads by 42.1% in Cinebench R23 multicore, 45.7% in physics simulation, and 62.7% in prime number finding, making it the stronger choice for rendering, simulation, and data processing workloads.

Users whose workloads are dominated by lightly threaded tasks at moderate frequencies may prefer the Core 5 210H for its 3.1% PassMark single-thread edge. The Core 5 also offers a lower base clock of 2.20 GHz, which in this dataset correlates with its single-thread win, and it is built for mobile platforms with a BGA 1744 socket and Iris Xe Graphics 48EU.

The Core 9 273PTE launched at an MSRP of $549, while the Core 5 210H launched at $342. The benchmark data shows the Core 9 delivers substantially higher performance across nearly all recorded workloads, with the Core 5 retaining a narrow single-thread advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded specifications:

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

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

| Cores | 8 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base clock | 2.20 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

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

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

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2024-12-17 | 2026-03-08 |

| Launch MSRP | $342 | $549 |

| Part number | SRQ6RQ5MN | SA4QJ |

| Average benchmark score | 24872 | 31143 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 77 | 82 |