Intel Core 9 273PE vs Intel Core i9-14900F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a clear and consistent pattern: the Intel Core i9-14900F dominates the Intel Core 9 273PE in nearly every measured workload. Out of 17 direct benchmark comparisons, the i9-14900F claims 16 wins, while the Core 9 273PE takes only a single victory. The margins are substantial across most tests, with the i9-14900F often leading by roughly 20% or more.

In the Cinebench suite, the i9-14900F shows a uniform advantage. Cinebench R15 multicore results show the i9-14900F at 3986 versus 3153 for the Core 9 273PE, a delta of -20.9% from the perspective of the latter. Single-core R15 scores follow the same pattern: 562 against 445, a -20.8% difference. This consistency carries through Cinebench R20 and R23. In R20 multicore, the i9-14900F scores 16611 compared to 13140 (-20.9%), and in R20 single-core it reaches 2344 versus 1855 (-20.9%). The R23 multicore test shows the i9-14900F at 39551 against 31288 (-20.9%), while R23 single-core shows 5583 versus 4417 (-20.9%). The uniformity of this -20.9% delta across all Cinebench versions indicates a fundamental per-thread and aggregate throughput advantage for the i9-14900F, likely tied to its larger core configuration.

PassMark tests reinforce this narrative with even larger gaps in specific areas. Data compression shows the i9-14900F at 564207 versus 405885, a -28.1% delta. Data encryption widens further: 34644 against 22719, a -34.4% delta. Random string sorting shows a -29.2% difference, with the i9-14900F scoring 63728 versus 45098. Integer math also favors the i9-14900F significantly, 177066 versus 139410, a -21.3% gap. Extended instructions testing shows 31084 against 24630 (-20.8%). Floating point math is closer but still favors the i9-14900F: 119550 versus 107884, a -9.8% delta. Multithread performance in PassMark shows 46532 versus 36810, a -20.9% gap, while single-thread scores show 4506 versus 3650, a -19% delta.

The sole win for the Core 9 273PE comes in PassMark physics, where it scores 3120 versus 2899 for the i9-14900F, a 7.6% advantage. This isolated result is notable because it suggests the Core 9 273PE's architecture handles physics simulations more efficiently per unit of work, even though its raw multithreaded throughput is lower. The closest overall contest is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the i9-14900F leads only 209 to 203, a -2.9% margin, indicating near parity in that specific integer workload.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share several foundational specifications but diverge in core counts and design intent. Both use Intel Socket 1700, a 10 nm process node, and are fabricated by Intel. The Core i9-14900F carries the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename, while the Core 9 273PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename. The i9-14900F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, whereas the Core 9 273PE is listed under Core 9 (Bartlett Lake).

Core configuration is the most striking difference. The i9-14900F offers 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core 9 273PE provides 12 cores and 24 threads. This means the i9-14900F has double the physical cores and 8 additional threads. The thread-to-core ratio also differs: the i9-14900F has 32 threads across 24 cores, while the Core 9 273PE has 24 threads across 12 cores, indicating a higher proportion of multithreaded capability per core in the latter. Base clocks are close, with the Core 9 273PE at 2.30 GHz and the i9-14900F at 2.00 GHz, but boost clocks favor the i9-14900F at 5.80 GHz versus 5.70 GHz.

Cache hierarchies are identical in structure and size. Both feature 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This means the performance gap is not attributable to cache capacity differences. Memory support matches as well, with both supporting DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The Core 9 273PE lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the i9-14900F does not have a recorded bandwidth figure. Both support ECC memory and offer PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

A notable difference appears in integrated graphics. The Core 9 273PE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the i9-14900F has no integrated graphics (N/A). The die size also differs, with the i9-14900F measured at 257 mm², while the Core 9 273PE has no recorded die size. Both processors have a locked multiplier and a TDP of 65 watts. Release dates are separated by over two years, with the i9-14900F launching on 2024-01-07 and the Core 9 273PE on 2026-03-08.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits into two distinct use-case profiles. The i9-14900F is the clear choice for heavily multithreaded workloads that scale with core count. The 24-core, 32-thread configuration delivers decisive advantages in rendering, video encoding, data compression, and encryption tasks. The Cinebench multicore results, which show a consistent ~21% lead across R15, R20, and R23, indicate the i9-14900F excels in CPU-intensive compute tasks such as 3D rendering and scientific simulations. The PassMark data compression and encryption tests, where the i9-14900F leads by 28.1% and 34.4% respectively, point to strong performance in file archiving, database operations, and security-related workloads.

Single-thread performance also favors the i9-14900F. The higher boost clock of 5.80 GHz, combined with the Raptor Lake architecture, delivers a ~19-21% advantage in single-core Cinebench and PassMark single-thread tests. This matters for everyday applications like web browsing, office productivity, and lightly threaded games, where per-core speed drives responsiveness.

The Core 9 273PE, despite losing 16 of 17 comparisons, holds one meaningful advantage: PassMark physics. Its 7.6% lead in that test suggests the Bartlett Lake architecture handles certain physics calculations more efficiently. This could translate to better performance in specific simulation engines or physics-based workloads that rely on particular instruction patterns. The near-tie in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 9 273PE trails by only 2.9%, also indicates that certain integer-heavy single-threaded tasks run nearly as well on the 12-core chip.

For users prioritizing raw throughput across a broad range of tasks, the i9-14900F is the obvious winner. The data shows no scenario where the Core 9 273PE outpaces it in general-purpose computing. The Core 9 273PE's niche appears limited to workloads that mirror the PassMark physics test, where architectural efficiency overcomes the core-count deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 9 273PE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The i9-14900F therefore offers double the physical cores and 8 additional threads.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F boosts to 5.80 GHz, while the Intel Core 9 273PE boosts to 5.70 GHz. The i9-14900F holds a 0.10 GHz advantage in maximum clock speed.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the benchmark data?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark data encryption, where the Intel Core i9-14900F scores 34644 versus 22719 for the Intel Core 9 273PE, a -34.4% difference from the latter's perspective.

Q: Does the Intel Core 9 273PE win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark physics with a score of 3120 versus 2899 for the Intel Core i9-14900F, a 7.6% advantage. This is the only benchmark win out of 17 comparisons.

Q: Do the processors have the same cache configuration?

A: Yes, both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Cache sizes are identical between the two.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PE includes UHD Graphics 730. The Intel Core i9-14900F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear verdict: the Intel Core i9-14900F is the superior processor for nearly all computing tasks. Its 24 cores and 32 threads provide a substantial multithreaded advantage, reflected in the ~21% lead across all Cinebench multicore tests and the ~20.9% lead in PassMark multithread. The single-thread performance is also better, with a ~19% advantage in PassMark single-thread and ~20.9% in Cinebench single-core. The i9-14900F also achieves a higher average benchmark score of 60008 versus 49845 for the Core 9 273PE, and it sits in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs compared to the 90th percentile for the Core 9 273PE.

The Core 9 273PE's single win in PassMark physics, with a 7.6% margin, does not offset the 16 losses. Its lower core count and slightly lower boost clock place it behind in every rendering, compression, encryption, and general compute test. The only scenarios where the Core 9 273PE approaches parity are PassMark find prime numbers, where it trails by just 2.9%, and PassMark floating point math, where it trails by 9.8%.

For users who need maximum throughput in rendering, video processing, data compression, or encryption, the i9-14900F is the processor the data supports. For workloads specifically involving physics simulations, the Core 9 273PE shows a measurable advantage, but this does not generalize to other tasks. The i9-14900F also benefits from a larger die size of 257 mm², which likely contributes to its higher transistor budget and performance. The Core 9 273PE's integrated graphics provide a convenience advantage for systems without a discrete GPU, but this does not compensate for the performance deficit in processing benchmarks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 9 273PE | Intel Core i9-14900F |

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

| Series | None listed | Core 14th Gen |

| Architecture | None listed | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-R |

| Generation | Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) | Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Cores | 12 | 24 |

| Threads | 24 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 5.80 GHz |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 257 mm² |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | $524 |

| Part Number | SA4QD | SRN3W |