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

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data positions the Intel Core 9 273PQE as the dominant processor in nearly every measurable workload. Across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the Core 9 273PQE records the higher score, giving it a clean sweep with zero wins for the Intel Core 5 221E. The average benchmark score for the Core 9 273PQE is 66,099, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 221E averages 40,144, which lands in the 87th percentile. The gap between the two is substantial, with the Core 9 273PQE delivering roughly 64% higher average performance.

The Core 5 221E is the lower-power, lower-thread-count option with a 65 TDP and 14 cores, while the Core 9 273PQE uses a 125 TDP and 12 cores but 24 threads. The Core 9 273PQE also carries a launch MSRP of $589, while the Core 5 221E has a launch MSRP of $232. The data shows that the Core 9 273PQE is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing maximum throughput, but the Core 5 221E remains relevant for scenarios where the higher core count at a lower power envelope is preferred. The Core 5 221E has two additional physical cores, which may benefit workloads that scale with core count rather than thread count, though the benchmark results do not show any workload where that advantage translates into a win.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core 9 273PQE wins every single recorded test. There is no workload category in the data where the Intel Core 5 221E comes out ahead. The closest contest is in the PassMark single-thread test, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 against 4,147 for the Core 5 221E, a delta of 9.3%. That is the narrowest margin in the entire comparison. The widest margin is in PassMark extended instructions, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 38,743 versus 18,216, a delta of 53%.

The Core 5 221E does offer a higher physical core count at 14 versus 12, and it consumes less power with a 65 TDP compared to 125. For a desktop user who values lower power draw and has workloads that are highly sensitive to physical core count rather than threads, the Core 5 221E may be the more sensible fit. However, the benchmark data does not provide any evidence that the extra two cores translate into a performance advantage in the tested workloads. All Cinebench and PassMark results favor the Core 9 273PQE, including multi-threaded tests where the Core 9 273PQE's 24 threads outperform the Core 5 221E's 20 threads.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Bartlett Lake codename and use Intel's 10 nm process node. They share the same Intel Socket 1700, dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and support both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. ECC memory support is present on both. Each also provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The core configurations differ. The Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core 9 273PQE therefore relies on more simultaneous multithreading to achieve its higher thread count. Base clocks differ: 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 221E versus 3.40 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE. Boost clocks also differ, with 5.20 GHz for the Core 5 221E and 5.90 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE. The higher clocks on the Core 9 273PQE are consistent with its higher TDP of 125 watts versus 65 watts.

Cache hierarchy is similar in structure but different in capacity. Both processors use 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core. The shared L3 cache is 24 MB on the Core 5 221E and 36 MB on the Core 9 273PQE. The larger L3 cache on the Core 9 273PQE likely contributes to its advantage in memory-sensitive workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 221E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 9 273PQE uses UHD Graphics 770. Both are desktop processors with an active production status. The Core 5 221E was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core 9 273PQE has a release date of 2026-03-08. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported according to the data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores, while the Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores. However, the Core 9 273PQE has 24 threads versus 20 threads for the Core 5 221E.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Core 5 221E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

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

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core 5 221E and the Core 9 273PQE support ECC memory. Both also support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration.

Q: What is the TDP for each processor?

A: The Core 5 221E has a TDP of 65 watts. The Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has an average benchmark score of 66,099, compared to 40,144 for the Core 5 221E. The Core 9 273PQE also ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 221E ranks in the 87th.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers 17 separate tests across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and PassMark suites. The Core 9 273PQE wins all of them, but the margins vary considerably by workload type.

In Cinebench R15, the Core 9 273PQE scores 3,950 in multi-core versus 2,613 for the Core 5 221E, a delta of 33.8%. The single-core result shows a similar gap: 557 versus 368, also a 33.9% delta. These are nearly identical margins, indicating that the Core 9 273PQE's advantage is consistent between single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering.

Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern. Multi-core scores are 16,459 for the Core 9 273PQE and 10,891 for the Core 5 221E, a 33.8% delta. Single-core scores are 2,323 versus 1,537, also a 33.8% delta. Cinebench R23 shows 39,190 versus 25,933 for multi-core and 5,532 versus 3,661 for single-core, both at a 33.8% delta. The consistent 33.8% delta across all Cinebench versions suggests that the architectural advantage of the Core 9 273PQE scales uniformly across rendering workloads.

The PassMark suite reveals more varied gaps. The most extreme difference is in extended instructions, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 38,743 against 18,216 for the Core 5 221E, a 53% delta. This test measures SIMD and vectorized instruction throughput, and the Core 9 273PQE's higher clocks and larger L3 cache likely drive this result. Data compression also shows a large gap: 585,752 versus 324,285, a 44.6% delta. Data encryption shows a 35.2% delta, with scores of 29,636 and 19,205.

Floating-point math favors the Core 9 273PQE by 37.1%, with 125,546 versus 79,028. Integer math shows a smaller but still significant 28.4% delta, at 164,629 versus 117,813. The PassMark multithread test shows a 33.8% delta, matching the Cinebench margins exactly, with scores of 46,107 and 30,510. Physics tests show a 19% delta, with 2,754 versus 2,230. Random string sorting shows a 29.1% delta, at 53,167 versus 37,686.

The narrowest margin is in find prime numbers, where the Core 9 273PQE scores 198 and the Core 5 221E scores 173, a 12.6% delta. This test is less dependent on memory bandwidth and more dependent on raw arithmetic throughput per core, so the smaller gap makes sense given the clock difference.

The single-thread PassMark tests show the smallest overall delta at 9.3%, with scores of 4,573 versus 4,147. The single-thread result is notably closer than the Cinebench single-core results, which showed a 33.9% delta. This suggests that the PassMark single-thread workload is less sensitive to the architectural differences between the two processors, while Cinebench's single-core test reflects a larger performance gap.

The average benchmark score comparison reinforces the head-to-head results. The Core 9 273PQE averages 66,099, while the Core 5 221E averages 40,144. The Core 9 273PQE's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66,159 and a delta of 0.1%, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65,914 with a delta of 0.3%, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66,855 with a delta of 1.1%, and the AMD EPYC 4465P at 66,925 with a delta of 1.2%. The Core 5 221E's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 at 40,081 with a delta of 0.2%, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 at 40,048 with a delta of 0.2%, the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40,246 with a delta of 0.3%, and the Intel Core i9-13905H at 40,313 with a delta of 0.4%.

The data indicates that the Core 9 273PQE sits in a performance class above the Core 5 221E, with its nearest rivals being high-end desktop and server processors. The Core 5 221E, meanwhile, competes with mainstream desktop and mobile parts. The 17-0 win record for the Core 9 273PQE is unambiguous, and the only meaningful advantage for the Core 5 221E is its lower TDP and higher physical core count, neither of which translates into a benchmark victory in the recorded data.