Intel Core 9 273PQE vs Intel Core i7-14701E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records a consistent and decisive performance gap between the Intel Core 9 273PQE and the Intel Core i7-14701E. Across all 17 head-to-head comparisons, the Core 9 273PQE takes the win, with the narrowest margin still a solid 6.2% advantage. The largest deltas appear in heavily threaded and compute-intensive workloads, where the Core 9 273PQE’s additional cores and higher clocks produce dramatic separation.

In Cinebench testing, the pattern is remarkably uniform. The Core 9 273PQE posts a 76.6% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core (3950 versus 2237), and the same 76.6% margin appears in R20 multi-core (16459 versus 9321) and R23 multi-core (39190 versus 22195). Single-core Cinebench results tell a similar story: the Core 9 273PQE leads by 76.8% in R15 (557 versus 315), 76.7% in R20 (2323 versus 1315), and 76.6% in R23 (5532 versus 3133). The consistency of these percentages suggests the gap is structural, driven by core count, thread count, and clock speed, rather than workload-specific behavior.

PassMark results show even wider spreads in certain categories. Data compression favors the Core 9 273PQE by 107% (585752 versus 282939), while floating point math shows a 102.9% lead (125546 versus 61873) and integer math a 102.4% advantage (164629 versus 81325). Extended instructions, a measure of SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, delivers the largest delta in the entire dataset at 109.1% (38743 versus 18528). Data encryption also nearly doubles the i7-14701E’s output, with a 99.4% gap (29636 versus 14862).

The closest contest comes in PassMark single-thread performance. The Core 9 273PQE scores 4573 against 4305 for the i7-14701E, a 6.2% margin. This modest single-thread advantage stands in contrast to the multi-thread dominance, indicating that the Core 9 273PQE’s clock speed and architecture improvements translate into only a small per-core uplift. The i7-14701E remains competitive in lightly threaded tasks, but it cannot match the Core 9 273PQE when all cores are engaged.

PassMark physics and prime number finding show smaller but still clear leads. The Core 9 273PQE wins physics by 14.8% (2754 versus 2399) and prime number finding by 12.5% (198 versus 176). Random string sorting goes to the Core 9 273PQE by 82.3% (53167 versus 29158), and the multi-thread aggregate score shows a 76.6% gap (46107 versus 26112).

The average benchmark score reinforces the hierarchy: the Core 9 273PQE sits at 66099, while the i7-14701E averages 33206. In the database’s percentile ranking, the Core 9 273PQE lands at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i7-14701E sits at the 83rd percentile. The Core 9 273PQE’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus (0.1% higher average score), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (0.3% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (1.1% lower), and the AMD EPYC 4465P (1.2% lower). The i7-14701E, by contrast, trades blows with mobile and workstation parts: the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H matches it exactly, the AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX is 0.3% behind, and the Intel Core i7-13650HX is 0.4% behind.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 9 273PQE wins every recorded benchmark, so the distinction between the two parts is a matter of degree rather than category. Still, the data reveals where the gap is largest and where the i7-14701E manages to stay within striking distance.

The Core 9 273PQE delivers its most extreme advantages in parallel and data-heavy workloads. PassMark extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, and data compression all show margins above 100%. These results indicate that the Core 9 273PQE is particularly well suited to rendering, scientific computation, encryption, and compression tasks where multiple cores can be saturated. The Cinebench multi-core results, all near 76.6% ahead, reinforce this profile: content creation and 3D rendering workloads should see substantial throughput gains.

The i7-14701E’s relative strengths appear in single-threaded and latency-sensitive tasks. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4305 trails by only 6.2%, and the PassMark physics result shows a 14.8% gap, the second-smallest margin in the dataset. Prime number finding, which often scales with integer and branch performance, shows a 12.5% gap. These smaller deltas suggest that in everyday desktop use, where single-core responsiveness matters, the i7-14701E is not dramatically outclassed. The Core 9 273PQE still wins, but the margin compresses to single digits or low teens.

Power and thermal characteristics also separate the two. The Core 9 273PQE carries a 125 W TDP, while the i7-14701E is rated at 65 W. The i7-14701E’s lower power envelope may make it easier to cool in compact systems, though the benchmark data does not include thermal or efficiency measurements. Both processors use the same Intel Socket 1700, so platform compatibility is identical.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE leads by 76.6% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 39190 against 22195 for the Intel Core i7-14701E. PassMark multi-thread shows the same 76.6% gap, 46107 versus 26112.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Core 9 273PQE wins PassMark single-thread by 6.2%, scoring 4573 versus 4305. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 9 273PQE leads by 76.6% (5532 versus 3133), a much larger margin than the PassMark result.

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

A: The largest delta is in PassMark extended instructions, where the Core 9 273PQE leads by 109.1% (38743 versus 18528). Data compression follows at 107% (585752 versus 282939).

Q: What is the smallest performance gap?

A: The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core 9 273PQE leads by 6.2% (4573 versus 4305). PassMark physics shows a 14.8% gap and prime number finding a 12.5% gap.

Q: How do the processors rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: The Core 9 273PQE is at the 93rd percentile with an average benchmark score of 66099. The i7-14701E is at the 83rd percentile with an average score of 33206.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory and expansion features?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, both support ECC memory, and both use PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Both also integrate UHD Graphics 770.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several platform-level specifications but diverge sharply on core configuration and power. The Core 9 273PQE uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the i7-14701E uses 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ as well: the Core 9 273PQE runs at 3.40 GHz, and the i7-14701E at 2.60 GHz. Boost clocks also favor the Core 9 273PQE, with 5.90 GHz against 5.40 GHz.

Thermal design power shows the largest specification gap. The Core 9 273PQE is rated at 125 W, nearly double the i7-14701E’s 65 W. Both use Intel Socket 1700, and neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking headroom is not a differentiator in the recorded data.

Cache hierarchies differ mainly in L3 capacity. The Core 9 273PQE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-14701E has 33 MB. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 80 KB per core and 2 MB per core respectively. Memory bandwidth is listed for the Core 9 273PQE at 89.6 GB/s, while no figure is recorded for the i7-14701E. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, both support ECC memory, and both integrate UHD Graphics 770.

The release dates place the i7-14701E earlier, with a launch date of 2024-06-30, while the Core 9 273PQE arrives later on 2026-03-08. The Core 9 273PQE has a recorded launch MSRP of $589; the i7-14701E has no recorded launch MSRP. Die size is listed for the i7-14701E at 257 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Core 9 273PQE.

Architecture Differences

The Core 9 273PQE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 9 (Bartlett Lake) generation. The i7-14701E uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R codename within the Core 14th Gen series. Both are manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel, but the architectural lineage differs: Bartlett Lake is a newer design generation, while Raptor Lake Refresh represents an iterative update of an earlier family.

The core and thread counts reflect the architectural split. The Core 9 273PQE offers 12 cores and 24 threads, a 50% increase in core count over the i7-14701E’s 8 cores and 16 threads. This additional parallelism is the primary driver behind the large multi-thread benchmark margins, particularly in Cinebench and PassMark multi-thread tests.

Cache design also differs at the L3 level. The Core 9 273PQE provides 36 MB of shared L3 cache versus 33 MB on the i7-14701E. Per-core L1 and L2 allocations are identical at 80 KB and 2 MB per core respectively. The extra L3 capacity on the Core 9 273PQE may help in workloads with large working sets, though the benchmark data does not isolate cache effects from core count effects.

Both processors are fabricated by Intel on a 10 nm node, so architectural differences are not accompanied by a process node change. The i7-14701E has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Core 9 273PQE. The Core 9 273PQE’s higher TDP of 125 W, compared to 65 W for the i7-14701E, reflects the larger core count and higher clock speeds, which require a more substantial power delivery and cooling solution.

Both parts sit in the desktop market segment, remain in active production, and support identical memory and PCIe configurations. The integrated graphics solution is the same UHD Graphics 770 on both. The principal architectural differences are therefore the core topology, the L3 cache allocation, and the generation-specific design choices embodied in Bartlett Lake versus Raptor Lake Refresh.