Intel Core 3 100U vs Intel Core 5 213PTE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 213PTE dominates every recorded benchmark in the comparison. Across all 17 head-to-head tests, the Core 5 213PTE wins outright, with no single test favoring the Intel Core 3 100U. The widest gaps appear in multi-threaded and math-heavy workloads, while the narrowest gap emerges in single-threaded PassMark testing.

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent performance split. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 213PTE scores 21751 against 10624 for the Core 3 100U, a delta of 51.2% in favor of the Core 5. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 3070 versus 1499, again a 51.2% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 9135 versus 4462, and R20 single-core lands at 1289 versus 629. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2192 against 1070, with single-core at 309 versus 150. Every Cinebench test, whether multi-core or single-core, reports the same 51.2% delta, indicating a uniform scaling advantage for the Core 5 213PTE across rendering workloads.

PassMark results tell a more varied story. The largest delta in the entire comparison is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 5 213PTE scores 157 against 52, a 66.9% advantage. Floating point math shows a 60.5% gap (71722 versus 28322), and physics follows at 60.2% (2199 versus 876). Integer math lands at 57.5% (93109 versus 39580). Extended instructions deliver a 51.1% delta (16146 versus 7894), matching the multithread test at 51.1% (25590 versus 12522). Data compression shows a 47.7% gap (261083 versus 136497), while random string sorting is 49.5% apart (30106 versus 15191). Data encryption comes in at 43.6% (14413 versus 8128).

The closest contest is PassMark single-thread scoring, where the Core 5 213PTE posts 3718 against 3506, a modest 5.7% advantage. This narrow margin indicates that per-core single-thread performance is similar, and the Core 5 213PTE's overall dominance stems primarily from its additional cores and higher thread count rather than a dramatic per-core speed advantage.

The average benchmark score reinforces the hierarchy. The Core 5 213PTE averages 32924 across all tests, while the Core 3 100U averages 16148. The Core 5 213PTE sits at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 3 100U rests at the 70th percentile. In nearest-rival comparisons, the Core 5 213PTE is effectively tied with the Intel Core i7-12700 (delta of 0.1% in favor of the i7-12700), slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H by 0.3%, and marginally behind the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and AMD Ryzen 7 8700G by 0.5% each. The Core 3 100U, by contrast, sits within 1.2% of the Intel Core i7-10850H, Intel Core i5-10600KF, Intel Core i7-1260U, and AMD Ryzen 5 4600H, with deltas ranging from 0.3% to 1.2% in favor of those rivals. The data confirms that the Core 5 213PTE competes in a higher performance tier entirely.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins with a score of 21751, compared to 10624 for the Intel Core 3 100U, a 51.2% advantage.

Q: How close is single-thread performance between the two?

A: The closest margin across all tests is PassMark single-thread, where the Core 5 213PTE scores 3718 and the Core 3 100U scores 3506, a 5.7% gap. Cinebench single-core tests show a wider 51.2% delta, but the PassMark result indicates similar per-core capability.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the comparison?

A: PassMark find prime numbers shows the biggest delta at 66.9%, with the Core 5 213PTE scoring 157 versus 52 for the Core 3 100U.

Q: How do the two processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Core 5 213PTE averages 32924 and is within 0.5% of the Intel Core i7-12700, AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and AMD Ryzen 7 8700G, while leading the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H by 0.3%. The Core 3 100U averages 16148 and trails its nearest rivals by 0.3% to 1.2%, including the Intel Core i7-10850H, Intel Core i5-10600KF, Intel Core i7-1260U, and AMD Ryzen 5 4600H.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 100U win any benchmark in the head-to-head data?

A: No. The Core 5 213PTE wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, and the Core 3 100U records zero wins.

Q: What do the percentile rankings indicate?

A: The Core 5 213PTE ranks at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 3 100U ranks at the 70th percentile, placing the Core 5 213PTE in a higher overall performance bracket.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 5 213PTE is the faster processor in every measured category, with decisive advantages in multi-threaded rendering, math workloads, compression, encryption, and even single-thread PassMark scoring. The Core 5 213PTE's average benchmark score of 32924 is roughly double the Core 3 100U's 16148, and its 83rd percentile ranking places it well above the Core 3 100U's 70th percentile.

The Core 3 100U does not offer a single head-to-head win, but its nearest-rival standings show it remains competitive with mid-range processors like the Intel Core i7-1260U and AMD Ryzen 5 4600H, trailing them by only 1.1% and 1.2% respectively. For workloads that do not demand maximum throughput, the Core 3 100U still sits in a respectable performance tier, though it cannot match the Core 5 213PTE's output.

The Core 5 213PTE, by comparison, aligns with desktop-class parts such as the Intel Core i7-12700 and AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with deltas under 0.5%. The choice between these two processors, strictly from benchmark data, depends on whether the workload requires the higher throughput that the Core 5 213PTE delivers. For multi-core rendering, large data compression, encryption, or floating-point math, the Core 5 213PTE is the superior option by a wide margin. For tasks that are lightly threaded and not throughput-bound, the Core 3 100U's single-thread PassMark score of 3506 remains within 5.7% of the Core 5 213PTE, making the gap much smaller in that specific scenario.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Core 3 100U uses 6 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 5 213PTE uses 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.20 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.70 GHz versus 5.20 GHz, both favoring the Core 5 213PTE. Thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 3 100U is rated at 15 W, while the Core 5 213PTE is rated at 45 W.

The socket and market segment also separate them. The Core 3 100U uses Intel BGA 1744 and targets the mobile segment, while the Core 5 213PTE uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop segment. The Core 3 100U supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes, whereas the Core 5 213PTE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Memory bandwidth is listed only for the Core 5 213PTE at 76.8 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Core 3 100U. ECC memory support is absent on the Core 3 100U and present on the Core 5 213PTE. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 3 100U uses UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Core 5 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730.

Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 100U carries the part number SRMYL, and the Core 5 213PTE carries SA4QM. The Core 3 100U has a launch MSRP of $426, while the Core 5 213PTE has a launch MSRP of $221. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 100U is built on Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-U codename, while the Core 5 213PTE uses Bartlett Lake architecture with the Bartlett Lake codename. Both are fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, but the cache layouts diverge. The Core 3 100U has 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 213PTE has 2 MB of L2 cache per core and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core.

The Core 5 213PTE's larger L2 and L3 caches align with its higher core count and desktop positioning. The Core 3 100U's smaller cache pool and lower TDP fit its mobile role. The Core 5 213PTE also includes ECC memory support, which the Core 3 100U lacks, and its PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes stands in contrast to the Core 3 100U's PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

Release timing differs by over two years. The Core 3 100U was released on January 7, 2024, while the Core 5 213PTE was released on March 8, 2026. The generation labels reflect this split: the Core 3 100U is listed as Core 3 (Raptor Lake-U), and the Core 5 213PTE is listed as Core 5 (Bartlett Lake).

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 213PTE wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is defined by the size of its margins rather than by any Core 3 100U victory. The Core 5 213PTE is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, where Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 51.2% advantage. It also leads heavily in math-intensive work: floating-point math is 60.5% ahead, integer math is 57.5% ahead, and prime number finding is 66.9% ahead. Physics simulation favors the Core 5 213PTE by 60.2%, and extended instruction workloads are 51.1% ahead. Data compression and encryption also favor the Core 5 213PTE, with gaps of 47.7% and 43.6% respectively. Random string sorting is 49.5% ahead, and the multithread PassMark score is 51.1% ahead.

The Core 3 100U's best case appears in single-threaded PassMark testing, where the Core 5 213PTE leads by only 5.7%. For lightly threaded tasks that do not scale across cores, the Core 3 100U is closer in performance, though still behind. The Core 3 100U also offers a 15 W TDP compared to the Core 5 213PTE's 45 W, which indicates a lower power envelope for the mobile part, though the Core 5 213PTE's higher TDP aligns with its desktop segment and higher sustained performance.

The Core 5 213PTE's desktop socket, PCIe Gen 5 support, and ECC memory compatibility position it for systems that require server-like reliability features and high-bandwidth expansion. The Core 3 100U's mobile socket and lower TDP position it for portable systems where power efficiency matters more than raw throughput. In every recorded benchmark, however, the Core 5 213PTE delivers the higher score, and the Core 3 100U's only relative strength is the narrow single-thread gap.