AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core 5 213PTE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two processors into distinct performance profiles. The Intel Core 5 213PTE takes 10 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, but the AMD Ryzen 7 250 secures five decisive victories in specific workloads. The largest single margin belongs to Intel in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 5 213PTE scores 3070 against AMD's 1715, a 44.1% advantage. That gap is echoed in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel posts 21751 versus AMD's 14676, a 32.5% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a similar story: Intel wins 309 to 269, a 12.9% delta.

The AMD side counters with strong showings in PassMark data compression (300708 against 261083, a 15.2% win), data encryption (17661 versus 14413, a 22.5% margin), and extended instructions (21613 versus 16146, a 33.9% edge). AMD also wins random string sorting by 19.1% (35861 versus 30106). Those five wins cluster around data processing and cryptographic workloads, while Intel dominates raw compute throughput tests.

The closest contest is PassMark integer math, where Intel wins by only 1.7% (93109 versus 91565). PassMark multi-thread is nearly as tight, with Intel ahead by 2% (25590 versus 25089). PassMark single-thread favors Intel by 1.1% (3718 versus 3678), and the duplicate passmark_singlethread entry confirms the same result. The two largest Intel margins after the Cinebench results are PassMark physics (2199 versus 1147, a 47.8% gap) and PassMark find prime numbers (157 versus 73, a 53.5% gap). Floating point math also goes to Intel by 25.7% (71722 versus 53285).

Overall average scores reflect the split. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 carries an average benchmark score of 38221 and sits at the 86th percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 213PTE averages 32924, placing it at the 83rd percentile. Despite losing the head-to-head count, AMD's average is higher because its wins land in high-weight PassMark tests, while Intel's largest margins come from Cinebench workloads that contribute less to the aggregate score.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the stronger choice for data-oriented tasks. Its PassMark data compression score of 300708 outpaces Intel by 15.2%, and its encryption result of 17661 beats Intel's 14413 by 22.5%. Extended instruction throughput shows the largest AMD advantage at 33.9% (21613 versus 16146), indicating strong SIMD and specialized instruction execution. Random string sorting also favors AMD by 19.1%, suggesting efficient memory access patterns for sorting workloads. These results point to a processor well suited for compression, encryption, and data transformation pipelines.

The Intel Core 5 213PTE excels in rendering, physics simulation, and general compute. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives Intel a 32.5% lead (21751 versus 14676), and R23 single-core shows a 44.1% advantage (3070 versus 1715). The physics test shows a 47.8% gap in Intel's favor (2199 versus 1147), and prime number finding favors Intel by 53.5% (157 versus 73). Floating point math also swings Intel's way by 25.7% (71722 versus 53285). These results indicate Intel is better suited for ray tracing workloads, physics engines, and numerical simulation.

Mixed territory appears in integer math and multi-threaded throughput. Intel wins both, but by narrow margins: 1.7% in integer math (93109 versus 91565) and 2% in PassMark multi-thread (25590 versus 25089). Single-thread performance also favors Intel, but only by 1.1% (3718 versus 3678). The data suggests that for general productivity and lightly threaded applications, the two processors trade blows within a small margin, while heavily threaded rendering and physics workloads clearly favor Intel.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC and is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename. It belongs to the Ryzen 7 generation and fits the AMD Socket FP8. The Intel Core 5 213PTE uses a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry, carries the Bartlett Lake codename, and fits the Intel Socket 1700. Intel's process node is considerably larger, yet the chip still delivers higher clock speeds in several benchmarks.

Core and thread counts match at 8 cores and 16 threads for both parts. Cache layouts differ substantially. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger caches likely contribute to its Cinebench and physics advantages. AMD's transistor count is listed at 25,000 million with a die size of 178 mm², while Intel's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. AMD lists a 3.30 GHz base clock and a 5.10 GHz boost clock. Intel lists a 2.10 GHz base clock and a 5.20 GHz boost clock. Intel's higher boost clock aligns with its single-thread wins, while the lower base clock does not prevent Intel from winning multi-threaded tests. Thermal design power differs: AMD is rated at 28 watts, Intel at 45 watts. The higher power envelope likely explains Intel's sustained performance in multi-core Cinebench runs.

Memory support diverges. AMD supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel operation and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel also supports ECC memory, while AMD does not. PCIe connectivity differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 780M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 730. Market segments also differ, with AMD targeting mobile and Intel targeting desktop. Release dates show AMD arriving on 2025-01-05 and Intel on 2026-03-08. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $221.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 averages 38221 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Intel Core 5 213PTE averages 32924. AMD also ranks higher in percentile placement at 86 versus Intel's 83.

Q: Why does Intel win Cinebench R23 multi-core by such a large margin?

A: Intel scores 21751 in Cinebench R23 multi-core compared to AMD's 14676, a 32.5% lead. Contributing factors in the recorded data include Intel's larger L3 cache (24 MB versus 16 MB), larger L2 cache (2 MB per core versus 1 MB per core), and higher 45 watt TDP compared to AMD's 28 watts.

Q: Where does AMD hold its biggest advantage?

A: AMD's largest win is in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 21613 against Intel's 16146, a 33.9% margin. AMD also leads in data encryption by 22.5% and random string sorting by 19.1%.

Q: Does Intel support more memory types?

A: Yes. The Intel Core 5 213PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 only. Intel also supports ECC memory, which AMD does not.

Q: What is the single closest benchmark result?

A: PassMark integer math is the closest, with Intel scoring 93109 against AMD's 91565, a 1.7% difference. PassMark multi-thread is nearly as close at 2% (25590 versus 25089).

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 boosts to 5.10 GHz. Intel's base clock is lower at 2.10 GHz versus AMD's 3.30 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 250 | Intel Core 5 213PTE |

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

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Base clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 780M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-03-08 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $221 |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 178 mm² | Not recorded |