AMD Ryzen 5 130 vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the dominant performer across the entire recorded benchmark suite. All 17 benchmark results in the database belong to the Intel part, giving it a clean sweep. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 holds no benchmark wins in the recorded data, meaning the database shows it trailing in every measured workload type, from single-threaded tests to heavily multithreaded rendering workloads.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE occupies the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen 5 130 sits at the 50th percentile. That percentile gap translates into distinctly different performance tiers. The Intel processor's average benchmark score of 66099 places it among high-end desktop parts, while the AMD processor has no recorded average benchmark score in the database, reinforcing its position as a lower-tier mobile part.

For use-case planning, the Intel Core 9 273PQE is the only reasonable choice for multithreaded workloads such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or software compilation. The AMD Ryzen 5 130, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, would struggle to keep pace in those scenarios. The Intel part also wins every single-threaded test, which matters for lightly threaded applications like legacy games, spreadsheet workloads, or general desktop responsiveness.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.55 GHz. The thermal design power is 28 watts, which classifies it as a low-power mobile processor. It uses AMD Socket FP7 and targets the mobile segment.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.90 GHz. The thermal design power is 125 watts, which is more than four times the AMD part's power envelope. It uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop segment.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD processor has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part's L2 cache is four times larger per core, and its L3 cache is more than double the AMD part's.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD processor supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with a higher bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs, with the AMD part using Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD processor uses Radeon 660M, while the Intel processor uses UHD Graphics 770.

The process node advantage belongs to AMD (6 nm vs. 10 nm), but Intel compensates with a much larger core count, higher clocks, and a much higher power ceiling. The AMD part's smaller node and lower TDP make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, while the Intel part's 125 W TDP requires a robust desktop cooling solution and power delivery.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors, so the comparison relies on the Intel Core 9 273PQE's recorded scores and the AMD Ryzen 5 130's absence of recorded scores. The Intel part's Cinebench results demonstrate its multithreaded strength. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel processor scores 39190. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it scores 16459, and in Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 3950. These figures place it clearly in high-end desktop territory.

Single-threaded performance is equally strong. The Intel processor scores 5532 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 2323 in Cinebench R20 single-core, and 557 in Cinebench R15 single-core. The PassMark single-thread score of 4573 reinforces this picture. For workloads that depend on a single core, the Intel part's 5.90 GHz boost clock provides a substantial advantage.

The PassMark suite shows consistent strength across different workload types. Integer math scores 164629, floating-point math scores 125546, and extended instructions score 38743. Data compression scores 585752, and data encryption scores 29636. Random string sorting scores 53167, and finding prime numbers scores 198. The multithread score is 46107, and the physics score is 2754.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its positioning. It is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, which averages 66159 and trails by only 0.1%. It is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, and 1.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4465P. This places it in a competitive band with some of the fastest processors available, despite its relatively modest positioning in Intel's product stack.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130, with no recorded benchmark scores, cannot be compared numerically to any rival. The database simply lacks the measurements needed to quantify its performance. The absence of data, combined with its 50th percentile ranking, indicates it sits near the middle of the CPU performance distribution. The Intel part's 93rd percentile ranking places it near the top.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE boosts to 5.90 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 boosts to 4.55 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 supports DDR5 only.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a TDP of 125 watts. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a TDP of 28 watts.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s.

Q: How does the Intel Core 9 273PQE compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: It is 0.1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, and 1.2% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4465P.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses the Zen 3+ architecture with the Rembrandt-R codename, while the Intel Core 9 273PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename. The AMD part is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Core and thread counts differ by a factor of two. The AMD processor has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel processor has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the AMD part and 3.40 GHz for the Intel part. Boost clocks are 4.55 GHz and 5.90 GHz, respectively. The TDP difference is substantial: 28 watts for the AMD part versus 125 watts for the Intel part.

Cache hierarchies differ across all levels. L1 cache is 64 KB per core for AMD and 80 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache is 512 KB per core for AMD and 2 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache is 16 MB shared for AMD and 36 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support differs. The AMD processor supports DDR5 only, while the Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for AMD and 89.6 GB/s for Intel. PCIe generation differs, with Gen 4 on the AMD part and Gen 5 on the Intel part. The AMD part exposes 20 CPU lanes, while the Intel part exposes 16 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD processor uses Radeon 660M, while the Intel processor uses UHD Graphics 770. Socket compatibility is entirely different: AMD Socket FP7 for the AMD part and Intel Socket 1700 for the Intel part. The market segments also differ, with the AMD part classified as mobile and the Intel part as desktop.

Process nodes and foundries differ. The AMD part uses TSMC's 6 nm process with a die size of 210 mm². The Intel part uses Intel's 10 nm process, with no die size recorded in the database. Release dates differ as well, with the AMD part released on September 30, 2025, and the Intel part released on March 8, 2026.

The Intel Core 9 273PQE has a launch MSRP of $589. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the clear performance winner in every recorded benchmark category. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, and 5.90 GHz boost clock deliver multithreaded and single-threaded performance that places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rival data confirms its position: it trades results within 1.2% of processors like the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D and the Intel Core Ultra 5 series, all of which are high-end desktop parts.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 is a fundamentally different product. It targets the mobile segment with a 28 watt TDP, 6 cores, and 12 threads. Its 50th percentile ranking indicates mid-pack performance. The 6 nm TSMC process and Radeon 660M integrated graphics make it suitable for compact laptops, but the database contains no benchmark scores to support any performance claims.

The choice between these two processors depends entirely on the intended use case. For desktop builds requiring maximum compute throughput, the Intel Core 9 273PQE is the only option with recorded performance data. For mobile systems where power efficiency matters, the AMD Ryzen 5 130's 28 watt TDP and mobile socket are appropriate, but the absence of benchmark data means performance expectations should be modest.

The Intel part costs $589 at launch MSRP, which aligns with its high-end desktop positioning. The AMD part has no recorded launch price. The architectural differences, from process node to cache size to memory support, all favor the Intel processor for raw performance. The AMD processor's advantages are limited to power consumption and process node geometry, neither of which translates into benchmark dominance in this comparison.