Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive performance hierarchy between the Intel Core 5 330 and the Intel Core 9 273PQE. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, the Core 9 273PQE records the higher score. The magnitude of the advantage varies substantially by workload, from a narrow single-thread margin to a dominating multi-thread and integer math gap.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 9 273PQE scores 39,190 against 13,150 for the Core 5 330, a delta of 66.4%. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Core 9 273PQE delivers 16,459 versus 5,523, again a 66.4% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 3,950 against 1,325, a 66.5% delta. These results indicate that the Core 9 273PQE roughly triples the multi-threaded rendering throughput of the Core 5 330.

Single-core performance also favors the Core 9 273PQE, but by a smaller margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 9 273PQE scores 5,532 versus 1,856, a 66.4% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2,323 against 779, a 66.5% delta. The PassMark single-thread test records 4,573 for the Core 9 273PQE and 4,088 for the Core 5 330, a much narrower 10.6% delta. This suggests that the clock speed advantage of the Core 9 273PQE, with its 5.90 GHz boost versus 4.60 GHz, translates into a modest but consistent single-thread lead.

The largest proportional gap appears in PassMark integer math. The Core 9 273PQE scores 164,629, while the Core 5 330 scores 33,258, a delta of 79.8%. This near five-fold difference reflects the combination of 12 cores with 24 threads versus 6 cores with 6 threads, plus the higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s against 59.7 GB/s. Data compression also shows a wide gap: 585,752 versus 145,287, a 75.2% delta. The Core 9 273PQE compresses data at roughly four times the rate.

Floating-point math follows the same trend. The Core 9 273PQE scores 125,546 against 43,885, a 65% delta. Extended instruction throughput shows 38,743 versus 12,808, a 66.9% delta. Random string sorting records 53,167 against 17,771, a 66.6% delta. Data encryption delivers 29,636 versus 11,076, a 62.6% delta. Physics simulation shows 2,754 versus 1,201, a 56.4% delta, the second smallest proportional gap after single-thread. Prime number finding records 198 versus 114, a 42.4% delta, the smallest gap overall.

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 5 330 averages 18,345, sitting in the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 9 273PQE include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66,159 and a delta of 0.1% against the Core 9, meaning the Core 9 trails that rival by a tenth of a percent. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D averages 65,914, a delta of 0.3% in favor of the Core 9. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus averages 66,855, a delta of 1.1% in favor of that rival. The AMD EPYC 4465P averages 66,925, a delta of 1.2% in favor of that rival.

For the Core 5 330, the nearest rivals cluster much closer. The Intel Core i3-14100 averages 18,318, a delta of 0.1% in favor of the Core 5. The Intel Core 7 360 averages 18,374, a delta of 0.2% in favor of that rival. The Intel Core i3-13100 averages 18,380, a delta of 0.2% in favor of that rival. The Intel Core 3 305 averages 18,302, a delta of 0.2% in favor of the Core 5. These small deltas indicate that the Core 5 330 sits within a tightly grouped performance band among low-power mobile processors.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is defined by the degree of its advantage rather than by any reversal. The largest gaps appear in integer-heavy and multi-threaded workloads. Integer math, data compression, and multi-core rendering all show deltas above 65%. These workloads benefit from the Core 9 273PQE's 12 cores, 24 threads, 36 MB of shared L3 cache, and dual-channel memory bus. The Core 5 330, with 6 cores, 6 threads, 6 MB of shared L3 cache, and a single-channel memory bus, cannot match the parallel throughput.

The smallest gaps appear in single-thread and prime-number workloads. The PassMark single-thread delta is 10.6%, and the prime number delta is 42.4%. These workloads depend more on per-core clock speed and instruction efficiency than on core count. The Core 9 273PQE still leads, but the Core 5 330's 4.60 GHz boost clock keeps the margin comparatively modest. For lightly threaded tasks, the Core 5 330 remains within a reachable distance.

The Core 9 273PQE also holds the advantage in memory-bound work. Its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 59.7 GB/s, combined with dual-channel support, explains the wide data compression and encryption deltas. The Core 5 330's single-channel memory bus limits its ability to feed data to the cores at the same rate.

The Core 5 330 does have a structural advantage in power envelope. Its 15 W TDP against 125 W for the Core 9 273PQE makes it suitable for compact mobile designs. The Core 9 273PQE, as a desktop part with a 125 W TDP, requires substantial cooling and power delivery. The benchmark data shows no workload where the Core 5 330 wins, but its lower power draw and mobile form factor define its role.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE scores 39,190 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core 5 330 scores 13,150, a delta of 66.4% in favor of the Core 9.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core 9 273PQE scores 4,573 against 4,088 for the Core 5 330, a delta of 10.6%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 9 scores 5,532 versus 1,856, a delta of 66.4%.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 330 supports single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has an average benchmark score of 66,099, placing it in the 93rd percentile. The Intel Core 5 330 has an average score of 18,345, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core 5 330 and Intel Core 9 273PQE differ across nearly every core specification. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 330 against 3.40 GHz for the Core 9 273PQE. Boost clocks also differ: 4.60 GHz versus 5.90 GHz.

Power draw separates the two clearly. The Core 5 330 has a TDP of 15 W, and the Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 W. The sockets are different as well. The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, a ball-grid array for mobile, while the Core 9 273PQE uses Intel Socket 1700 for desktop.

Cache hierarchies diverge. 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 273PQE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 on the Core 9 273PQE totals 24 MB across 12 cores.

Memory support differs. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus. The Core 9 273PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. ECC memory is not supported on the Core 5 330 but is supported on the Core 9 273PQE.

PCIe capabilities differ. The Core 5 330 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics also differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe units on the Core 5 330 versus UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 9 273PQE.

Market segments and release dates differ. The Core 5 330 is a mobile part released on 2026-04-15. The Core 9 273PQE is a desktop part released on 2026-03-08. Both are active in production and have locked multipliers. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 330 is $309, and the launch MSRP for the Core 9 273PQE is $589. Part numbers are SAE3G for the Core 5 330 and SA4Q9 for the Core 9 273PQE.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures. The Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's foundry. The Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process node, also at Intel's foundry. The 3 nm node for the Core 5 330 represents a more advanced manufacturing process compared to the 10 nm node for the Core 9 273PQE.

The generation labels reflect the architecture split. The Core 5 330 belongs to the Core 5 generation under Wildcat Lake. The Core 9 273PQE belongs to the Core 9 generation under Bartlett Lake. These are distinct design families targeting different power and performance envelopes.

The core configuration differences extend beyond counts. The Core 5 330 uses 6 cores with no hyper-threading, giving 6 threads. The Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores with hyper-threading, giving 24 threads. This thread doubling is a major factor in the multi-threaded benchmark deltas.

Cache architecture differs in organization. The Core 5 330 provides a fixed L1 cache of 192 KB and a fixed L2 cache of 2.5 MB, shared across the 6 cores. The Core 9 273PQE provides per-core L1 of 80 KB and per-core L2 of 2 MB, scaling with core count. The L3 cache is shared in both, but the Core 9 273PQE's 36 MB is six times larger than the Core 5 330's 6 MB.

Memory architecture reflects the market split. The Core 5 330 uses a single-channel memory bus, which limits memory bandwidth to 59.7 GB/s. The Core 9 273PQE uses a dual-channel bus, achieving 89.6 GB/s. The Core 9 273PQE also supports DDR4 in addition to DDR5, while the Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The LPDDR5X support on the Core 5 330 aligns with its mobile positioning.

PCIe architecture differs by generation and lane count. The Core 5 330 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, sufficient for one or two devices in a mobile platform. The Core 9 273PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, supporting a high-bandwidth GPU and storage on a desktop platform.

Integrated graphics differ in design. The Core 5 330 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, a newer graphics architecture. The Core 9 273PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, an established desktop integrated GPU. The Xe3 architecture on the Core 5 330 is designed for efficiency in a 15 W envelope, while UHD Graphics 770 serves the desktop segment.

ECC memory support is exclusive to the Core 9 273PQE. The Core 5 330 does not support ECC memory. This makes the Core 9 273PQE suitable for error-sensitive workstation or server-adjacent workloads. The Core 5 330, without ECC support, targets consumer mobile devices.

The production status for both processors is active, and both have locked multipliers. The release timing places the Core 9 273PQE about five weeks earlier than the Core 5 330. The architectural split between Wildcat Lake on 3 nm and Bartlett Lake on 10 nm explains the efficiency difference: the Core 5 330 delivers competitive single-thread performance at a fraction of the power draw, while the Core 9 273PQE uses additional cores, threads, cache, and memory bandwidth to dominate multi-threaded workloads.