Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core 9 270H Comparison

Intel Core 5 330 and Intel Core 9 270H are two mobile processors with very different design goals. The Core 5 330 is a low-power, single-channel part built on a modern 3 nm node, while the Core 9 270H is a high-core-count, high-power part on a mature 10 nm node. The benchmark data shows a clear split: the Core 9 270H dominates nearly every multi-threaded and compute-heavy test, while the Core 5 330 holds narrow wins in single-threaded PassMark tests and one prime-number workload. The average benchmark score for the Core 9 270H is 38335, placing it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 330 averages 18345, at the 72nd percentile. That gap of roughly 109% in average score sets the stage for a comparison that is less about balance and more about workload-specific strengths.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 270H is the clear winner for multi-threaded productivity. Its 14 cores and 20 threads give it a massive advantage in any workload that scales across cores. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 18000 points versus 13150 for the Core 5 330, a 26.9% lead. That advantage grows in older Cinebench versions: R20 multicore shows 10268 versus 5523, a 46.2% gap, and R15 multicore shows 2464 versus 1325, also 46.2%. The pattern is consistent across PassMark tests that use heavy parallelism. Data compression scores 333785 versus 145287, a 56.5% lead. Integer math scores 97654 versus 33258, a 65.9% lead, the largest single gap in the entire comparison. Multithreaded PassMark scores 28764 versus 15471, a 46.2% lead. Random string sorting shows 36867 versus 17771, a 51.8% lead. Floating-point math also favors the Core 9 270H at 70640 versus 43885, a 37.9% lead. Physics simulation scores 1966 versus 1201, a 38.9% lead. Data encryption scores 19369 versus 11076, a 42.8% lead. Extended instructions score 20079 versus 12808, a 36.2% lead. In every one of these tests, the Core 9 270H wins by at least 26.9%, with most gaps above 37%.

The Intel Core 5 330 wins in exactly three benchmark categories, and two of those are the same test recorded twice. The PassMark single-thread test and the PassMark singlethread test both show 4088 for the Core 5 330 versus 3944 for the Core 9 270H, a 3.7% lead. That is a modest but real advantage in lightly threaded performance. The third win is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 5 330 scores 114 versus 112, a 1.8% lead. These are narrow wins, not the kind of margin that changes application selection, but they do indicate that the Core 5 330 is not universally slower. The single-thread result is notable because the Core 9 270H has a higher boost clock of 5.80 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, yet the Core 5 330 still comes out ahead in this specific PassMark workload. In Cinebench single-core tests, the Core 9 270H wins, so the PassMark single-thread result does not generalize across all single-threaded workloads.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple choice. The Intel Core 9 270H is the processor to pick for any workload that uses multiple cores, which includes rendering, video encoding, data compression, encryption, and most professional applications. It wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, and in the multi-threaded tests it wins by margins ranging from 26.9% to 65.9%. Its average benchmark score of 38335 places it at the 86th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H at 38312 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Xeon w3-2525 at 38392 (0.1% ahead). That places it in strong company for a mobile processor.

The Intel Core 5 330 is the pick only for scenarios where the workload is strictly single-threaded and where the PassMark single-thread metric is representative. Its 3.7% lead over the Core 9 270H in that test is real, but it comes with the caveat that Cinebench R23 single-core shows the Core 9 270H ahead by 9% (2040 versus 1856). The Core 5 330 also wins the prime-number test by 1.8%, but that is a narrow edge in a niche workload. With an average benchmark score of 18345 at the 72nd percentile, it sits close to the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (0.2% ahead). It is a capable low-power part, but it is not competitive with the Core 9 270H in overall throughput. For anyone choosing between these two, the Core 9 270H is the correct choice unless the power envelope or the specific single-thread PassMark workload is the deciding factor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Intel Core 9 270H comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 97654 against 33258 for the Core 5 330, a 65.9% lead. This is the single biggest delta in the entire benchmark set. Data compression is the second largest, with 333785 versus 145287, a 56.5% lead. Random string sorting follows at 36867 versus 17771, a 51.8% lead. The Cinebench multicore tests cluster around the same 46% mark: R15 multicore at 2464 versus 1325, R20 multicore at 10268 versus 5523, and PassMark multithread at 28764 versus 15471 all show a 46.2% gap. Data encryption shows 19369 versus 11076, a 42.8% lead. Physics shows 1966 versus 1201, a 38.9% lead. Floating-point math shows 70640 versus 43885, a 37.9% lead. Extended instructions show 20079 versus 12808, a 36.2% lead. Cinebench R23 multicore shows the smallest multicore gap at 26.9%, with 18000 versus 13150, but that is still a substantial margin.

The single-core picture is more nuanced. Cinebench R23 singlecore gives the Core 9 270H a 9% lead, 2040 versus 1856. Cinebench R20 singlecore shows a 46.2% lead, 1449 versus 779, and Cinebench R15 singlecore shows a 46.4% lead, 347 versus 186. These large Cinebench single-core gaps are surprising given the PassMark results, and they suggest that the Core 9 270H has a significant advantage in Cinebench's specific single-threaded workload. In contrast, PassMark single-thread and singlethread both show the Core 5 330 ahead by 3.7%, 4088 versus 3944. The prime-number test is the only other Core 5 330 win, 114 versus 112, a 1.8% lead. The two processors split the single-threaded tests, but the Core 9 270H wins the more demanding Cinebench workloads while the Core 5 330 wins the PassMark synthetic.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 9 270H has an average benchmark score of 38335, while the Intel Core 5 330 has an average of 18345. The Core 9 270H sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 330.

Q: How large is the multi-threaded performance gap?

A: The Core 9 270H leads by 46.2% in Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, and PassMark multithread. The lead is 26.9% in Cinebench R23 multicore, 56.5% in data compression, and 65.9% in integer math.

Q: Does the Core 5 330 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. It wins PassMark single-thread and singlethread with a score of 4088 versus 3944, a 3.7% lead. It also wins the PassMark find prime numbers test, 114 versus 112, a 1.8% lead.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: The Core 5 330 is closest to the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (0.2% ahead). The Core 9 270H is closest to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H at 38312 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Xeon w3-2525 at 38392 (0.1% ahead).

Q: How do the single-core Cinebench scores compare?

A: The Core 9 270H leads in all three Cinebench single-core tests. R23 singlecore shows 2040 versus 1856, a 9% lead. R20 singlecore shows 1449 versus 779, a 46.2% lead. R15 singlecore shows 347 versus 186, a 46.4% lead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families. The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation, built on a 3 nm process node. The Intel Core 9 270H uses the Raptor Lake-H codename and belongs to the Core 9 generation, specifically Raptor Lake Refresh, built on a 10 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process node difference is substantial: 3 nm versus 10 nm. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading, while the Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads, indicating a mix of performance and efficiency cores with hyper-threading on the performance cores. The Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core 9 270H has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz.

Cache configurations also differ. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 270H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 270H uses a dual-channel memory bus with support for DDR4 and DDR5. The Core 5 330 uses a single-channel memory bus with support for DDR5 and LPDDR5X, and its memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s. The Core 9 270H does not have a recorded memory bandwidth figure in the database. PCIe support differs as well: the Core 5 330 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 9 270H uses Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are different: the Core 5 330 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core 9 270H has Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units.

Specification Differences

The core count difference is the most obvious specification gap. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks differ by 1.20 GHz: 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 330 versus 2.70 GHz for the Core 9 270H. Boost clocks differ by 1.20 GHz as well: 4.60 GHz versus 5.80 GHz. Thermal design power is a major differentiator: 15 W for the Core 5 330 versus 45 W for the Core 9 270H. The sockets are different: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 330 and Intel BGA 1744 for the Core 9 270H. Process node is 3 nm for the Core 5 330 and 10 nm for the Core 9 270H. Memory support differs: DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Core 5 330, DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 9 270H. The memory bus is single-channel for the Core 5 330 and dual-channel for the Core 9 270H. The Core 5 330 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core 9 270H has none listed. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 6 lanes for the Core 5 330 and Gen 5 with 8 lanes for the Core 9 270H. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores for the Core 5 330 and Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units for the Core 9 270H. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 330 is $309, and the launch MSRP for the Core 9 270H is $697. The release dates differ as well: the Core 5 330 launched on 2026-04-15 and the Core 9 270H launched on 2024-12-17.