Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core 9 273PE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy between these two Bartlett Lake processors. The Intel Core 9 273PE dominates the majority of the recorded tests, winning 15 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core 5 221E secures only two wins, both in the PassMark single-threaded tests. Across the Cinebench suite, the Core 9 273PE consistently leads by roughly 17% in every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 9 scores 3153 against the Core 5's 2613, a 17.1% gap. The same pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Core 9 posts 13140 versus 10891, and in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the scores are 31288 and 25933 respectively. Single-core Cinebench results show a similar margin: R15 scores of 445 versus 368, R20 scores of 1855 versus 1537, and R23 scores of 4417 versus 3661, each with a delta of about 17.1%.

The PassMark suite reveals where the Core 9's advantage expands or contracts. The largest margin appears in PassMark physics, where the Core 9 scores 3120 against the Core 5's 2230, a 28.5% lead. Floating point math also favors the Core 9 heavily: 107884 versus 79028, a 26.7% difference. Extended instructions show a 26% gap, with scores of 24630 and 18216. Data compression results in a 20.1% lead for the Core 9 (405885 versus 324285). Smaller but still decisive margins appear in random string sorting (16.4%), data encryption (15.5%), and integer math (15.5%). Prime number finding shows a 14.8% gap, with scores of 203 and 173.

The one notable reversal comes in PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests, where the Core 5 221E scores 4147 against the Core 9's 3650, a 13.6% advantage. This is the only benchmark category where the lower-tier processor wins, and it does so by a substantial margin. The multi-thread PassMark test still favors the Core 9 at 36810 versus 30510, a 17.1% lead.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design lineage. They are built on Intel's 10 nm process, fabricated by Intel, and use the Bartlett Lake codename. Both use the Intel Socket 1700 and are classified as Desktop parts. The integrated graphics are identical: UHD Graphics 730 on both. Memory support matches as well, with DDR4 and DDR5 support over a dual-channel bus delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and both support ECC memory. PCIe configuration is also the same: Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The core configurations differ in an interesting way. The Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. This means the Core 9 achieves its higher multi-threaded scores despite having fewer physical cores, which points to a different core arrangement or thread allocation strategy. The Core 9 compensates with a larger L3 cache: 36 MB shared versus 24 MB shared on the Core 5. Both processors use 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core.

Clock speeds also differ. The Core 5 has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core 9 starts lower at 2.30 GHz base but boosts higher to 5.70 GHz. Both have a 65 W TDP. The die size is listed for the Core 5 at 257 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Core 9. The Core 5 launched on 2025-01-12, while the Core 9's release date is recorded as 2026-03-08. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PE is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench multi-core results across R15, R20, and R23 all show a consistent 17.1% advantage. PassMark multi-thread confirms this at 17.1%. Applications that stress floating point math will see the biggest benefit, with the Core 9 leading by 26.7%. Physics simulations show the largest gap at 28.5%, making the Core 9 particularly suited for computational workloads that rely on physics calculations. Data compression tasks also favor the Core 9 by 20.1%, which matters for archiving, backup, and database workloads. Extended instruction workloads, such as those using AVX or similar sets, show a 26% advantage for the Core 9.

The Core 5 221E holds one specific advantage: single-threaded PassMark performance. Its score of 4147 beats the Core 9's 3650 by 13.6%. This suggests that for applications that are strictly single-threaded and do not scale across cores, the Core 5 may deliver snappier responsiveness. However, the Cinebench single-core tests tell the opposite story, with the Core 9 leading by about 17% in all three versions. The discrepancy between PassMark and Cinebench single-thread results indicates that the two processors respond differently to the specific instruction mixes in each benchmark. The Core 5's win in PassMark single-thread is real and reproducible, but it is the exception rather than the rule.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE wins every multi-core benchmark in the database. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 31288 versus 25933, a 17.1% lead. PassMark multi-thread shows 36810 versus 30510, also a 17.1% lead.

Q: Does the Core 5 221E win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Core 5 221E wins the PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests with a score of 4147, beating the Core 9's 3650 by 13.6%.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 9 achieves higher multi-threaded scores despite fewer physical cores.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 221E has 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Core 5 221E boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Core 9 273PE boosts higher to 5.70 GHz. The Core 5 has a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz versus 2.30 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core 5 221E and the Core 9 273PE support ECC memory, along with DDR4 and DDR5 memory types over a dual-channel bus.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 versus 2.30 GHz for the Core 9. Boost clocks also differ, with the Core 9 reaching 5.70 GHz versus 5.20 GHz for the Core 5. L3 cache capacity favors the Core 9 at 36 MB shared, compared to 24 MB shared on the Core 5. The die size is recorded as 257 mm² for the Core 5, while no die size is listed for the Core 9. Launch dates differ significantly: the Core 5 released on 2025-01-12 and the Core 9 on 2026-03-08. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 is $232, and the launch MSRP for the Core 9 is $549. The part numbers also differ: SRQDVQ659 for the Core 5 and SA4QD for the Core 9. The processors share identical specifications in process node (10 nm), TDP (65 W), socket (Intel Socket 1700), memory bus (dual-channel), memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), ECC support, PCIe configuration (Gen 5, 16 lanes), integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), L1 cache (80 KB per core), L2 cache (2 MB per core), and multiplier lock status.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core 9 273PE as the stronger processor for almost all workloads. Its 15 benchmark wins out of 17 comparisons, combined with a 90th percentile ranking among all CPUs, place it clearly above the Core 5 221E, which sits at the 87th percentile. The average benchmark score difference is substantial: 49845 for the Core 9 versus 40144 for the Core 5. The Core 9's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 at 49796 (0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49394 (0.9% behind), placing it in competitive company. The Core 5's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 at 40081 (0.2% behind) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 at 40048 (0.2% behind).

The Core 5 221E remains relevant for scenarios where its PassMark single-thread advantage of 13.6% matters, and its lower launch MSRP of $232 versus $549 may factor into purchasing decisions. However, the data cannot support a general recommendation for the Core 5 over the Core 9. The Core 9 wins every Cinebench test, every multi-threaded PassMark test, and most single-threaded tests outside of PassMark. Its larger L3 cache and higher boost clock likely contribute to these results. For workloads involving physics, floating point math, data compression, or extended instructions, the Core 9 leads by margins ranging from 15.5% to 28.5%. The Core 5's single-thread PassMark win is noteworthy but does not offset the Core 9's comprehensive dominance across the rest of the benchmark suite.