Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core 9 273PTE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records 17 direct comparisons between the Intel Core 5 320 and the Intel Core 9 273PTE. The Core 9 273PTE wins 15 of those tests, while the Core 5 320 wins only 2. The margin of victory varies dramatically by workload type.

The largest single gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 9 273PTE scores 20445 against the Core 5 320's 6197. That is a 69.7% deficit for the Core 5 320, the steepest delta recorded in this head-to-head set. The Core 9 273PTE also dominates PassMark integer math, scoring 82411 versus 32323, a 60.8% difference. These two results point to a clear advantage in heavily parallel, compute-dense tasks.

Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar pattern, with the Core 9 273PTE at 2060 and the Core 5 320 at 1054, a 48.8% gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core narrows that slightly to 36.4% (8586 versus 5462). PassMark data compression follows the trend: 258704 for the Core 9 273PTE versus 148779 for the Core 5 320, a 42.5% difference. PassMark multithread, floating point math, physics, and random string sorting all land in the 30% to 38% range in favor of the Core 9 273PTE.

The Core 9 273PTE also leads in single-core Cinebench tests, although by smaller margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 290 versus 276, a 4.8% edge. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1212 versus 771, which is a 36.4% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core gives 2886 versus 1926, a 33.3% advantage. Data encryption (14253 versus 10984, 22.9%), extended instructions (15952 versus 13262, 16.9%), and prime number finding (142 versus 110, 22.5%) all favor the Core 9 273PTE as well.

The one area where the Core 5 320 comes out ahead is PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4045 against the Core 9 273PTE's 3433. That is a 17.8% win for the Core 5 320, and it appears twice in the data (once as passmark_single_thread and once as passmark_singlethread, both identical). This is the only significant reversal in the entire comparison. In every other recorded test, the Core 9 273PTE delivers the higher score.

Looking at aggregate performance, the Core 5 320 has an average benchmark score of 18023, while the Core 9 273PTE averages 31143. The Core 9 273PTE sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 320. Nearest rival data for the Core 9 273PTE includes the Intel Core i7-12700F (average 31081, within 0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS (31074, 0.2%), and the Intel Core i7-13700TE (31028, 0.4%). For the Core 5 320, the closest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17994, 0.2%), the Intel Core 5 120U (17898, 0.7%), and the Intel Core i5-1334U (18154, -0.7%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families and use different manufacturing processes. The Core 5 320 is built on a 3 nm process and belongs to the Wildcat Lake generation, while the Core 9 273PTE uses a 10 nm process and is part of the Bartlett Lake generation. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the process node difference is substantial.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads, doubling the core count and quadrupling the thread count. That thread advantage directly explains the large multi-core benchmark gaps. Clock speeds also differ: the Core 5 320 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Core 9 273PTE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Core 9 273PTE boosts higher, but the Core 5 320 has a slightly higher base frequency.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 273PTE has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, plus 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The total L3 capacity for the Core 9 273PTE is six times larger than the Core 5 320's shared L3. Memory support also differs: the Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 9 273PTE also supports ECC memory, which the Core 5 320 does not.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 9 273PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are different: the Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core 9 273PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The two chips also target different sockets. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket, while the Core 9 273PTE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. The market segments reflect that: mobile for the Core 5 320, desktop for the Core 9 273PTE. Thermal design power differs, with the Core 5 320 rated at 15 watts and the Core 9 273PTE at 45 watts. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PTE wins overwhelmingly in multi-threaded and heavily parallel workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core, with its 69.7% lead, is the strongest example. PassMark integer math (60.8% lead), data compression (42.5%), and Cinebench R15 multi-core (48.8%) all confirm this pattern. For rendering, simulation, data processing, or any workload that scales with core and thread count, the Core 9 273PTE is the clear choice based on the recorded scores.

The Core 9 273PTE also leads in most single-core Cinebench tests. Its Cinebench R20 single-core score of 1212 is 36.4% ahead, and its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2886 is 33.3% ahead. That suggests superior per-core performance in those specific rendering tests, despite the higher boost clock of the Core 5 320 falling short in these workloads.

The Core 5 320 wins the PassMark single-thread test with 4045 versus 3433, a 17.8% margin. This is the only benchmark where the Core 5 320 outperforms the Core 9 273PTE. For tasks that are strictly single-threaded and not covered by the Cinebench suite, such as certain legacy applications or lightweight interactive workloads, the Core 5 320 shows an advantage. However, this is a narrow win in a comparison where the Core 9 273PTE dominates everything else.

The data also shows a clear separation in overall capability. The Core 9 273PTE sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 5 320 sits at the 72nd percentile. The average benchmark score difference is 13120 points in favor of the Core 9 273PTE. For users who need maximum throughput in multi-core scenarios, the Core 9 273PTE is the only choice based on these measurements. For users whose workloads are predominantly single-threaded and match the PassMark single-thread pattern, the Core 5 320 offers a specific, though limited, advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 320 has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 12 cores and 24 threads.

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

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core 9 273PTE scores 20445 versus 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, a 69.7% difference.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4045, compared to 3433 for the Intel Core 9 273PTE, a 17.8% lead.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PTE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 320 does not.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 59.7 GB/s bandwidth with a single-channel bus. The Intel Core 9 273PTE has 89.6 GB/s bandwidth with a dual-channel bus.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core 9 273PTE wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests and holds the higher average benchmark score (31143 versus 18023). It also ranks higher in the overall percentile distribution (82nd versus 72nd). For any multi-threaded workload, rendering task, or data-heavy computation, the Core 9 273PTE is the superior option. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with 36 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory, deliver consistently higher scores across the entire Cinebench and PassMark suites.

The Intel Core 5 320 is not without merit. It wins the PassMark single-thread test by 17.8%, and its single-channel memory configuration and lower thermal design power suggest a more constrained, mobile-oriented design. For users who prioritize that specific single-thread metric, the Core 5 320 may be relevant. But the data shows no other area where it leads.

The Core 9 273PTE also benefits from a larger L3 cache, higher PCIe lane count (Gen 5, 16 lanes versus Gen 4, 6 lanes), ECC support, and higher memory bandwidth. The Core 5 320 uses a smaller process node (3 nm versus 10 nm) and has a higher base clock (1.50 GHz versus 1.40 GHz), but those advantages do not translate into benchmark wins outside of PassMark single-thread. Based on the recorded data, the Core 9 273PTE is the stronger processor for nearly all measured workloads.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 5 320 | Intel Core 9 273PTE |

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

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 6 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | $549 |