Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core 9 273PTE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two Bartlett Lake processors into distinct roles. The Intel Core 5 213PE wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE takes only 2. That asymmetry is not a fluke; it reflects a consistent pattern in how each chip handles different workloads.

The Core 5 213PE dominates in single-threaded and most multi-threaded tasks. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3172 beats the Core 9 273PTE's 2886 by 9.9%, and the PassMark single-thread result of 4060 versus 3433 gives the Core 5 an 18.3% lead. The same advantage appears in multi-core Cinebench runs: R23 multi-core shows 22468 against 20445, again a 9.9% gap. The Core 5 also wins in data compression (298804 versus 258704, +15.5%), encryption (15916 versus 14253, +11.7%), extended instructions (19565 versus 15952, +22.6%), floating-point math (68587 versus 60673, +13%), integer math (92089 versus 82411, +11.7%), multithreaded PassMark (26434 versus 24054, +9.9%), and random string sorting (32027 versus 28973, +10.5%).

The Core 9 273PTE wins in two specific workloads. PassMark find prime numbers shows 142 versus 114, a 19.7% advantage for the Core 9. PassMark physics shows 1917 versus 1624, a 15.3% lead. These wins are narrow in absolute terms but consistent, indicating the Core 9's higher core count helps in certain parallel integer and physics simulations.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture. The Core 5 213PE averages 35428 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 9 273PTE averages 31143, sitting in the 82nd percentile. The Core 5's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700T (average 35403, +0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i7-12700KF (average 35365, +0.2% delta). The Core 9's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12700F (average 31081, +0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS (average 31074, +0.2%).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. For users who prioritize raw throughput in rendering, compression, encryption, and general math workloads, the Intel Core 5 213PE is the stronger choice. It leads in every Cinebench iteration, every PassMark math category except prime numbers, and every data-processing test. Its single-thread performance is particularly strong, which benefits everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications.

The Intel Core 9 273PTE, despite having 12 cores versus 8, 24 threads versus 16, and a larger 36 MB L3 cache versus 24 MB, falls behind in most measured tasks. Its wins in prime number calculation and physics simulation suggest it handles certain parallel integer workloads more efficiently, but those gains do not translate into broader multi-core superiority. In fact, the Core 5 beats it in Cinebench R23 multi-core by a solid margin, which is unexpected given the Core 9's higher core count.

The Core 9 273PTE does offer advantages outside raw benchmark scores. Its 45 W TDP is notably lower than the Core 5's 65 W, and its memory bandwidth is higher at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. Both support DDR4 and DDR5, both use Intel Socket 1700, and both have UHD Graphics 730 integrated. The Core 9's launch MSRP is $549, while the Core 5's is $221. For users who need the extra cores for specific parallel tasks, the Core 9 justifies itself in those niches, but the benchmark record does not support a general performance advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Core 5 213PE comes in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 19565 against the Core 9's 15952, a 22.6% delta. This test measures SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, and the Core 5's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 5.50 GHz does not hurt; the per-core efficiency appears to be the deciding factor.

The second-largest win is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core 5 scores 4060 versus 3433, an 18.3% delta. This aligns with the Cinebench single-core results, where the Core 5 leads by 10% in R15 (319 versus 290), 9.9% in R20 (1332 versus 1212), and 9.9% in R23 (3172 versus 2886). The consistency across three Cinebench versions and two PassMark single-thread entries confirms a reliable per-core advantage.

In data compression, the Core 5 scores 298804 against 258704, a 15.5% lead. Encryption shows 15916 versus 14253, an 11.7% lead. Floating-point math shows 68587 versus 60673, a 13% lead. Integer math shows 92089 versus 82411, an 11.7% lead. Random string sorting shows 32027 versus 28973, a 10.5% lead. Multi-threaded PassMark shows 26434 versus 24054, a 9.9% lead. Every Cinebench multi-core test also lands at 9.9%: R15 at 2264 versus 2060, R20 at 9436 versus 8586, and R23 at 22468 versus 20445.

The Core 9 273PTE's wins are smaller in absolute gap but still significant. Prime number calculation shows 142 versus 114, a 19.7% delta in favor of the Core 9. Physics simulation shows 1917 versus 1624, a 15.3% delta. These two tests indicate the Core 9's additional cores do provide a measurable benefit in specific parallel algorithms, particularly those that scale with core count rather than clock speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has an average benchmark score of 35428, while the Intel Core 9 273PTE averages 31143. The Core 5 also sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs versus the Core 9's 82nd percentile.

Q: Does the Core 9 273PTE ever beat the Core 5 213PE in any test?

A: Yes. It wins in PassMark find prime numbers (142 versus 114) and PassMark physics (1917 versus 1624). Both wins are substantial, with deltas of 19.7% and 15.3% respectively.

Q: How do the core counts and cache sizes compare?

A: The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a 36 MB shared L3 cache. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a 24 MB shared L3 cache. Both have 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Core 5 213PE has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core 9 273PTE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Core 9 has a higher boost but a much lower base.

Q: Are both processors on the same socket and platform?

A: Yes, both use Intel Socket 1700. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory, both have dual-channel memory buses, and both include UHD Graphics 730 integrated graphics. Both also support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Core 5 213PE has a TDP of 65 W, while the Core 9 273PTE has a TDP of 45 W. The Core 9 consumes less power despite having more cores, which is notable for thermally constrained systems.

Architecture Differences

Both processors come from the same Bartlett Lake family, use the 10 nm process node, and are manufactured by Intel. The codename is identical, and both were released on the same date. The key architectural differences lie in core counts, cache hierarchy, clock behavior, and memory bandwidth.

The Core 9 273PTE doubles the thread count: 12 cores and 24 threads versus the Core 5's 8 cores and 16 threads. This additional parallelism does not translate into superior multi-core benchmark results, as the Core 5 leads in all three Cinebench multi-core tests and in PassMark multithread. The explanation appears to be clock-related. The Core 9's base clock of 1.40 GHz is far lower than the Core 5's 2.70 GHz. While the Core 9 boosts to 5.50 GHz, sustained multi-core workloads may not reach that frequency across all 12 cores, whereas the Core 5's higher base clock allows it to maintain higher throughput in shorter or less parallel workloads.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 9 has 36 MB. Per-core L1 and L2 are identical at 80 KB and 2 MB respectively. The larger L3 on the Core 9 should help with cache-sensitive workloads, yet the benchmark data does not show a consistent advantage in memory-heavy tests. The Core 5 wins in data compression and random string sorting, both of which rely on memory access patterns.

Memory bandwidth also differs. The Core 9 273PTE supports 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 5 213PE supports 76.8 GB/s. Both are dual-channel and both support DDR4 and DDR5. The higher bandwidth on the Core 9 is a real architectural advantage, but it does not overcome the Core 5's clock advantage in the recorded benchmarks.

Both processors have identical integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), identical PCIe configurations (Gen 5, 16 lanes), and identical ECC support. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The production status for both is Active, and both share the same release date. The process node is 10 nm for both, and the socket is Intel Socket 1700 for both.

The launch MSRP differs significantly: the Core 5 213PE launched at $221, while the Core 9 273PTE launched at $549. The benchmark data shows the Core 5 outperforming the Core 9 in most tests, which makes the Core 9's higher price a matter of specific workload fit rather than general performance. The Core 9's lower TDP (45 W versus 65 W) and higher memory bandwidth are its main architectural selling points, alongside the larger L3 cache and higher core count.

The nearest rival data places each processor in its own performance tier. The Core 5 213PE sits alongside the Intel Core i7-13700T and Intel Core i7-12700KF, all within 0.2% of each other in average score. The Core 9 273PTE sits alongside the Intel Core i7-12700F and AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS, also within 0.2%. The Core 5's tier is roughly 13% higher in average score than the Core 9's tier, which aligns with the head-to-head results.