Intel Core 5 120UL vs Intel Core 5 213PE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE records an average benchmark score of 35428, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 120UL averages 13594, which places it in the 68th percentile.

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 120UL compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 120UL sits within 1.1% of several comparable processors. It is 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core i3-12100F, 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core 3 N355, and 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-9500, while trailing the Intel Core 3 304 by 1.1%.

Q: Where does the Intel Core 5 213PE rank among its closest competitors?

A: The 213PE is essentially tied with the Intel Core i7-13700T, sitting just 0.1% ahead of it. It also leads the Intel Core i7-12700KF by 0.2%, the Intel Core i5-13600T by 0.3%, and the Intel Core i7-12700K by 0.4%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. However, the 213PE adds ECC memory support and a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the 120UL does not list ECC support or a bandwidth figure.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock and what is the difference?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 120UL boosts to 4.60 GHz. The 213PE also has a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz versus 1.30 GHz for the 120UL.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages despite sharing the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Intel Core 5 120UL is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, and belongs to the Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS) generation. The Intel Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation.

Both processors are manufactured on a 10 nm process node by Intel, but the internal designs diverge significantly. The Raptor Lake-PS part uses a 10-core, 12-thread configuration, while the Bartlett Lake part uses an 8-core, 16-thread configuration. This means the 120UL has more physical cores, but the 213PE has more threads due to simultaneous multithreading.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. Both list 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache differs: the 120UL has 1.25 MB per core, while the 213PE has 2 MB per core. The shared L3 cache jumps from 12 MB on the 120UL to 24 MB on the 213PE, a doubling of the last-level cache.

PCIe capabilities set the two apart as well. The 120UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 213PE provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This gives the 213PE a wider and faster interface for expansion devices.

The integrated graphics differ, with the 120UL featuring Iris Xe Graphics 80EU and the 213PE featuring UHD Graphics 730. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either part.

The 213PE also includes ECC memory support, which the 120UL lacks. Its memory bandwidth is recorded at 76.8 GB/s, a figure not listed for the 120UL.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 213PE wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, recording 17 wins out of 17 tests. The 120UL does not win a single recorded test. This makes the performance gap unambiguous.

The 213PE's largest margins come in extended instruction workloads, where it is 73.4% ahead of the 120UL, and data compression, where it leads by 63.5%. These are substantial multi-threaded and vectorized workloads that benefit from the 213PE's higher thread count, faster clocks, and larger cache.

The 213PE also shows strong advantages in floating-point math, integer math, and multithreaded PassMark tests, with margins of 61.6%, 58.7%, and 60.1% respectively. These results indicate that the 213PE is better suited for compute-heavy tasks that scale with thread count and per-core throughput.

The 120UL's role is more limited. It offers a lower thermal design power of 15 watts versus 65 watts for the 213PE, making it the more energy-efficient choice for thermally constrained environments. Its 10-core, 12-thread layout provides a slightly higher physical core count, which could matter in scenarios where core count matters more than thread count. However, the benchmark data does not show any workload where this translates into a performance win.

For users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness, the 213PE leads the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4060 versus 2080 for the 120UL, a 48.8% advantage. The 213PE also dominates Cinebench single-core tests, with a 60.2% lead in R15 and 60.1% leads in both R20 and R23 single-core tests.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show several key differences between the two processors.

Cores and Threads: The 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Clocks: The 120UL has a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The 213PE has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Thermal Design Power: The 120UL is rated at 15 watts. The 213PE is rated at 65 watts.

Cache: The 120UL has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 12 MB of shared L3. The 213PE has 2 MB of L2 per core and 24 MB of shared L3. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core.

Memory: Both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode. The 213PE adds ECC support and a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The 120UL does not list ECC support or a bandwidth figure.

PCIe: The 120UL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes. The 213PE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated Graphics: The 120UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The 213PE uses UHD Graphics 730.

Socket: Both use Intel Socket 1700.

Process Node: Both are on Intel's 10 nm process.

Release Date: The 120UL was released on 2024-04-07. The 213PE was released on 2026-03-08.

Part Number: The 213PE has a recorded part number of SA4QG. The 120UL's part number is listed as unknown.

Launch MSRP: The 213PE has a launch MSRP of $221. The 120UL has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent and decisive advantage for the Intel Core 5 213PE across every recorded test.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 213PE scores 2264 versus 904 for the 120UL, a 60.1% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern: 319 versus 127, a 60.2% lead.

Cinebench R20 continues the trend. The 213PE scores 9436 in multicore versus 3769, a 60.1% lead. In single-core, it scores 1332 versus 531, also a 60.1% lead.

Cinebench R23 shows the 213PE at 22468 in multicore versus 8974, a 60.1% lead. Single-core R23 has the 213PE at 3172 versus 1266, again a 60.1% lead.

PassMark tests reveal the widest gaps. Data compression has the 213PE at 298804 versus 109090, a 63.5% lead. Data encryption shows 15916 versus 7685, a 51.7% lead. Extended instructions show the largest margin: 19565 versus 5203, a 73.4% lead.

Find prime numbers has the 213PE at 114 versus 47, a 58.8% lead. Floating-point math shows 68587 versus 26311, a 61.6% lead. Integer math shows 92089 versus 38060, a 58.7% lead.

PassMark multithread has the 213PE at 26434 versus 10558, a 60.1% lead. Physics shows 1624 versus 807, a 50.3% lead. Random string sorting shows 32027 versus 13610, a 57.5% lead.

Single-threaded PassMark tests show the smallest gap still in favor of the 213PE: 4060 versus 2080, a 48.8% lead.

The narrowest margins are in physics and data encryption, where the 213PE leads by roughly half. The widest margins are in extended instructions and data compression, where the 213PE leads by roughly two-thirds to nearly three-quarters.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear hierarchy between these two processors. The Intel Core 5 213PE outperforms the Intel Core 5 120UL in every recorded benchmark, winning all 17 head-to-head tests. Its average benchmark score of 35428 places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the 120UL's 13594 places it in the 68th percentile.

The 213PE is the appropriate choice for workloads that depend on raw throughput, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. Its higher base and boost clocks, doubled L3 cache, larger L2 per core, and higher thread count all contribute to its consistent advantage. The data shows it performs at the level of processors like the Intel Core i7-13700T, i7-12700KF, and i5-13600T, all within 0.4% of its average score.

The 120UL, with its 15-watt TDP, is the more thermally conservative option. Its 10 physical cores provide a higher core count, but its lower clocks and smaller cache result in significantly lower scores across all tests. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Core i5-9500, which are older or lower-tier parts.

For users who need maximum performance from an Intel Socket 1700 platform, the 213PE is the clear selection. For thermally constrained systems where energy consumption is the priority, the 120UL offers a viable alternative, but the performance trade-off is substantial. The recorded data shows no scenario where the 120UL leads, making the 213PE the default recommendation for performance-oriented builds.