Intel Core 3 N350 vs Intel Core 5 213PE Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a decisive hierarchy between these two Intel processors. The Intel Core 5 213PE wins every single recorded benchmark, 17 out of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Core 3 N350 does not secure a single victory in any workload tested. This is not a close contest by any measure.

The Core 5 213PE delivers a 72.1% advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core testing, scoring 22468 against the N350's 6274. In single-threaded Cinebench R23, the margin is equally stark, with the Core 5 213PE scoring 3172 versus 885 for the N350, again a 72.1% delta. The average benchmark score confirms the gap: the Core 5 213PE averages 35428 across the database, while the N350 averages 9903. That places the Core 5 213PE in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the N350 sits in the 66th percentile.

The data indicates the Core 3 N350 belongs in low-power mobile systems where its 7 W TDP and compact BGA package are the primary considerations. Its performance profile is closer to older desktop parts, as its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-3770, which it edges by 2%, and the Intel Core i5-1035G1, which it leads by 2.3%. It trails the AMD EPYC 7F52 by 2.5% and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 by 3.2% in average score.

The Core 5 213PE, by contrast, performs at the level of recent desktop processors. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-13700T, which it matches within 0.1%, the Core i7-12700KF within 0.2%, the Core i5-13600T within 0.3%, and the Core i7-12700K within 0.4%. This is desktop-class throughput for a desktop platform, with a 65 W TDP and LGA 1700 socket.

For anyone choosing between these two, the decision comes down to platform: the N350 is a mobile-focused, low-power part with modest compute; the Core 5 213PE is a desktop processor with roughly three and a half times the average benchmark score. There is no workload category in the recorded data where the N350 closes the gap.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core it scores 22468 against 6274 for the Core 3 N350, a 72.1% difference. The PassMark multithread score shows 26434 for the Core 5 213PE versus 7382 for the N350.

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

A: The Core 5 213PE leads by 51.4% in PassMark single-thread, scoring 4060 versus 1974. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3172 versus 885, a 72.1% delta.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 5 213PE supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 N350 does not.

Q: What memory configurations does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are these processors from the same architecture family?

A: No. The Core 3 N350 uses the Twin Lake architecture with 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture with 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 5 213PE has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, compared to 3.90 GHz for the Core 3 N350. The base clocks are 2.70 GHz and 0.10 GHz respectively.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 N350 is built on the Twin Lake architecture, which the database lists as part of the Core 3 (Alder Lake-N) generation. It is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The design uses 8 cores with no hyper-threading, giving 8 threads. The cache layout is notable: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. This is a compact, efficiency-oriented design.

The Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture and is listed in the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. It is also fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. The core configuration differs significantly: 8 cores with hyper-threading, producing 16 threads. The cache structure is substantially larger: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The L2 allocation per core is a major architectural differentiator.

The memory controllers diverge as well. The N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but only on a single-channel bus. The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The recorded memory bandwidth reflects this: 38.4 GB/s for the N350 versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 213PE, exactly double.

PCIe capabilities are also different. The N350 provides Gen 3 with 9 CPU lanes. The Core 5 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. This is a generational and bandwidth gap that affects expandability.

The integrated graphics differ: the N350 carries UHD Graphics 770, while the Core 5 213PE carries UHD Graphics 730. Both are integrated solutions, but the database does not record comparative graphics benchmarks.

The Core 3 N350 is a mobile-market part on the Intel BGA 1264 socket. The Core 5 213PE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700. The production status for both is Active. The release dates are recorded as 2025-01-06 for the N350 and 2026-03-08 for the Core 5 213PE.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

The Core 3 N350 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The Core 5 213PE has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Thread count differs: the N350 has 8 threads, the Core 5 213PE has 16 threads. Both have 8 cores.

Thermal design power shows a major split: 7 W for the N350 versus 65 W for the Core 5 213PE.

Socket types are different: Intel BGA 1264 for the N350 versus Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 213PE.

The cache hierarchy differs in both L2 and L3. The N350 uses 2 MB shared L2 and 6 MB shared L3. The Core 5 213PE uses 2 MB per core L2 and 24 MB shared L3.

Memory support: the N350 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5; the Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bus width is single-channel for the N350 and dual-channel for the Core 5 213PE. Memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s.

ECC memory support: the N350 does not support it; the Core 5 213PE does.

PCIe: the N350 is Gen 3 with 9 lanes; the Core 5 213PE is Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 on the N350, UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 213PE.

Market segment: Mobile for the N350, Desktop for the Core 5 213PE.

The Core 5 213PE has a recorded launch MSRP of $221. No launch MSRP is recorded for the Core 3 N350.

The part numbers are SRPNS for the N350 and SA4QG for the Core 5 213PE.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 5 213PE dominates every recorded benchmark. The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread tests, where it leads by 51.4%, scoring 4060 versus 1974. The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it leads by 82.5%, scoring 114 versus 20.

In Cinebench R15, the Core 5 213PE scores 2264 in multi-core versus 632 for the N350, a 72.1% delta. Single-core shows 319 versus 89, also a 72.1% delta. Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern: 9436 versus 2635 in multi-core, 1332 versus 371 in single-core, both at 72.1%. Cinebench R23 multi-core is 22468 versus 6274, and single-core is 3172 versus 885, again both at 72.1%.

PassMark data compression shows the Core 5 213PE at 298804 versus 80444, a 73.1% advantage. Data encryption is 15916 versus 5693, a 64.2% delta. Extended instructions are 19565 versus 3981, a 79.7% delta.

Floating point math shows 68587 for the Core 5 213PE versus 17781 for the N350, a 74.1% delta. Integer math is 92089 versus 27669, a 70% delta. PassMark multithread is 26434 versus 7382, a 72.1% delta.

Physics scores are 1624 versus 446, a 72.5% delta. Random string sorting is 32027 versus 10102, a 68.5% delta.

The consistency of the margins is striking. Most tests fall in the 64% to 82% range. The single-thread tests show the smallest delta at 51.4%, but this still represents a massive performance gap. The data shows no workload category where the Core 3 N350 can claim competitiveness with the Core 5 213PE. The average benchmark score of 35428 for the Core 5 213PE versus 9903 for the N350, a 72.1% overall difference, summarizes the relationship between these two processors.