Intel Core 5 223PTE vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 9 273PQE carries the entire benchmark load in this comparison. The Intel Core 5 223PTE has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so the head-to-head comparison relies exclusively on the Core 9's measured results against its nearest rivals, along with the architectural differences between the two processors.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE records an average benchmark score of 66099, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs tracked by the database. Its closest competitor is the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, which scores 66159, a difference of only 0.1 percent in favor of the rival. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D trails by 0.3 percent with a score of 65914. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus sits 1.1 percent behind at 66855, while the AMD EPYC 4465P is 1.2 percent behind at 66925.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PQE delivers a score of 39190, while single-core reaches 5532. The Cinebench R20 results show 16459 multi-core and 2323 single-core. In Cinebench R15, the processor scores 3950 multi-core and 557 single-core. These results indicate a processor that scales well with thread counts, consistent with its 12-core, 24-thread configuration.

PassMark results reinforce the multi-threaded strength. The multithread score is 46107, with integer math at 164629 and floating point math at 125546. Data compression reaches 585752, while data encryption records 29636. Extended instructions score 38743, and random string sorting reaches 53167. The physics score is 2754, and prime number finding records 198. Single-thread performance shows 4573 on both the single_thread and singlethread tests.

The Core 5 223PTE, by contrast, has no measured scores in the database. Its percentile ranking sits at 50, with an average benchmark score of 0. No nearest rivals are listed for the Core 5, meaning the database currently holds no comparative data points for it. The Core 9's 93rd percentile standing places it far above the Core 5's 50th percentile ranking, though the Core 5's lack of recorded scores limits the precision of that comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 223PTE uses 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. Both also support ECC memory.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the Core 5 223PTE has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Both use 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core.

Q: How do their clock speeds compare?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The Core 5 223PTE has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz.

Q: Are both processors built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both use Intel's 10 nm process node and are built by Intel. Both also belong to the Bartlett Lake codename family and use the Intel Socket 1700.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Core 5 223PTE has a TDP of 45 watts.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same Bartlett Lake codename, 10 nm process node, and Intel foundry. They use the same Intel Socket 1700 and both integrate UHD Graphics 770. PCIe support is identical at Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The core configurations differ substantially. The Core 9 273PQE offers 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core 5 223PTE offers 8 cores and 16 threads. That difference of 4 cores and 8 threads directly affects multi-threaded workloads, as the Core 9's Cinebench and PassMark multi-core results demonstrate.

Clock speeds also separate the two. The Core 9's base clock of 3.40 GHz is 1.10 GHz higher than the Core 5's 2.30 GHz. The boost clock difference is smaller at 0.50 GHz, with the Core 9 reaching 5.90 GHz against the Core 5's 5.40 GHz. The higher base clock gives the Core 9 a sustained performance advantage in workloads that do not reach boost states.

Cache allocation differs in the shared L3 tier. The Core 9 carries 36 MB of shared L3 cache, 12 MB more than the Core 5's 24 MB. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 80 KB per core and 2 MB per core respectively. The larger L3 pool on the Core 9 benefits workloads with large working sets that repeatedly access shared data.

Memory support is identical across both parts: DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel, 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC support. The integrated graphics solution is also the same, UHD Graphics 770. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking via multiplier adjustment is not available on either.

Power envelopes diverge sharply. The Core 9's 125 watt TDP is nearly three times the Core 5's 45 watt TDP. The Core 5's lower TDP indicates a design focused on efficiency and reduced cooling requirements, while the Core 9's higher TDP supports its additional cores and higher clocks.

The Verdict

The data provides a clear split. The Core 9 273PQE is the higher-performance processor in every measurable dimension: more cores, more threads, higher base and boost clocks, more L3 cache, and a 93rd percentile ranking against all CPUs. Its benchmark scores confirm strong multi-threaded throughput, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39190 and a PassMark multithread score of 46107.

The Core 5 223PTE occupies a fundamentally different position. Its 50th percentile ranking and absence of recorded benchmark scores indicate that the database has not yet captured performance data for it. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration, 2.30 GHz base clock, and 45 watt TDP point to a lower-power design suited to less demanding workloads.

The Core 9's nearest rivals bracket its performance tightly. At 0.1 percent behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus and 0.3 percent ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, the Core 9 sits in competitive territory among high-end desktop processors. Its 93rd percentile ranking places it well above the Core 5's 50th percentile.

For workloads that scale with core count and thread count, the Core 9 273PQE is the clear choice. For applications where power draw and thermal output are primary constraints, the Core 5 223PTE's 45 watt TDP offers a much lighter load. The 125 watt TDP of the Core 9 requires more substantial cooling and power delivery.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 223PTE | Intel Core 9 273PQE |

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

| Cores | 8 | 12 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.90 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 125 W |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Part Number | SA4QL | SA4Q9 |

| Launch MSRP | $232 | $589 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 50 | 93 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 66099 |

| Nearest Rivals | None listed | Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, AMD EPYC 4465P |

Identical specifications include the Intel Socket 1700, Bartlett Lake codename, 10 nm process node, Intel foundry, L1 cache at 80 KB per core, L2 cache at 2 MB per core, DDR4 and DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics, Desktop market segment, Active production status, 2026-03-08 release date, and locked multipliers on both.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins every measured performance category. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39190 demonstrates strong scaling across 24 threads. The PassMark integer math score of 164629 and floating point math score of 125546 indicate robust computation throughput. Data compression at 585752 and random string sorting at 53167 point to strong memory and cache handling. The single-thread score of 4573 shows that the Core 9 also performs well in lightly threaded tasks, aided by its 5.90 GHz boost clock.

The Core 5 223PTE wins on power efficiency. Its 45 watt TDP is 80 watts lower than the Core 9's 125 watt TDP. This makes the Core 5 more suitable for systems with limited cooling capacity or smaller power supplies. The 2.30 GHz base clock and 5.40 GHz boost clock remain competitive for a lower-power part. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache provides solid cache capacity for an 8-core processor.

The 50th percentile ranking of the Core 5 suggests it sits at the midpoint of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 9's 93rd percentile places it among the top performers. The Core 9's nearest rival data shows it trading blows with the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus within 0.1 percent, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D within 0.3 percent, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus within 1.1 percent, and the AMD EPYC 4465P within 1.2 percent.

Workloads that benefit from the Core 9 include rendering, video encoding, data compression, scientific computation, and any parallel task that can utilize 24 threads. Workloads that favor the Core 5 include light productivity, general desktop use, and scenarios where the 45 watt TDP keeps thermal and power budgets low. The Core 9's 36 MB L3 cache also gives it an edge in data-heavy workloads that repeatedly access a large shared working set, while the Core 5's 24 MB L3 cache remains adequate for less demanding applications.