Intel Core 5 130UL vs Intel Core 5 213PTE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a complete benchmark suite only for the Intel Core 5 213PTE. The Intel Core 5 130UL has no recorded benchmark scores, no average score, and no rival comparisons. This means a direct head-to-head numerical comparison is impossible. The 213PTE's recorded data shows a processor that performs strongly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21751 and single-core score of 3070 place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The average benchmark score of 32924 sits within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-12700, which scores 32942. It also edges out the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H by 0.3%, with that rival scoring 32812. The AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and AMD Ryzen 7 8700G both score slightly higher at 33079 and 33089 respectively, putting the 213PTE 0.5% behind each.

Looking at the workload-specific PassMark results, the 213PTE shows distinct strengths. Multi-threaded performance reaches 25590, while single-thread performance records 3718. Integer math scores 93109, floating point math hits 71722, and extended instructions reach 16146. Data compression scores 261083, while data encryption completes at 14413. The processor finds prime numbers at a rate of 157, and random string sorting completes at 30106. Physics calculations score 2199.

The 130UL, by contrast, has no benchmark entries in the database. Its percentile ranking of 50 places it exactly at the median of all CPUs, but this is not derived from any measured benchmark data. The 213PTE's 83rd percentile ranking comes directly from its recorded scores. Without any measured results for the 130UL, the data cannot show where it wins or loses against the 213PTE. The only quantitative comparison possible comes from the specification differences, which are substantial and are detailed below.

The Verdict

The recorded data clearly favors the Intel Core 5 213PTE for any workload where benchmark scores matter. It delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21751 and a single-core score of 3070, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The 130UL has no benchmark scores in the database, so its actual performance is unmeasured. Its 50th percentile ranking is not backed by any recorded test result, making it an unreliable indicator of real-world capability.

The 213PTE's nearest rivals confirm its competitive position. It sits within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-12700, essentially matching that processor's average score. It outperforms the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H by 0.3%. The two AMD Ryzen 7 desktop parts, the 7800X3D and 8700G, lead it by 0.5% each. These margins are small, indicating the 213PTE competes in the upper mid-range of desktop processors.

The 130UL, with its 10 cores and 12 threads, lower clock speeds, and 15 W TDP, targets a different power envelope entirely. The 213PTE uses 8 cores and 16 threads, a 45 W TDP, and boosts to 5.20 GHz. The data suggests the 213PTE is the choice for users who need measured multi-threaded throughput and high single-thread responsiveness. The 130UL would only be preferable in scenarios where the 15 W power limit is mandatory, but the database provides no benchmark evidence to support any performance claim for it.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core 5 213PTE in single-core workloads than the Intel Core 5 130UL?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the 130UL, so a direct single-core comparison is not possible. The 213PTE records a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3070 and a PassMark single-thread score of 3718.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The 213PTE has an average benchmark score of 32924. The 130UL has an average benchmark score of 0, as no benchmarks are recorded for it in the database.

Q: How does the 213PTE compare to the Intel Core i7-12700?

A: The 213PTE's average score of 32924 is 0.1% lower than the Core i7-12700's average score of 32942. This places the two processors statistically equivalent in overall performance.

Q: Does the 130UL support ECC memory?

A: No. The database lists ECC memory support as false for the 130UL. The 213PTE supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The 213PTE boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the 130UL boosts to 4.70 GHz. The 213PTE also has a higher base clock at 2.10 GHz compared to 1.60 GHz.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the 213PTE?

A: The launch MSRP is $221. The 130UL has no launch MSRP listed in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The 130UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the 213PTE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The 213PTE has more threads despite fewer physical cores, indicating a different core configuration. Base clocks differ significantly: the 130UL runs at 1.60 GHz, the 213PTE at 2.10 GHz. Boost clocks also differ, with the 130UL reaching 4.70 GHz and the 213PTE boosting to 5.20 GHz.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The 130UL has a TDP of 15 W, while the 213PTE has a TDP of 45 W. Both use the Intel Socket 1700. The 130UL is built on Raptor Lake architecture with a Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the 213PTE uses Bartlett Lake architecture with a Bartlett Lake codename. Both are manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core on the 130UL versus 2 MB per core on the 213PTE. The L3 cache doubles from 12 MB shared on the 130UL to 24 MB shared on the 213PTE. The 213PTE records a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the 130UL has no memory bandwidth figure listed. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses. ECC memory support differs: the 130UL does not support ECC, the 213PTE does.

PCIe capabilities differ. The 130UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the 213PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the 130UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, the 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The 213PTE has a part number of SA4QM; the 130UL's part number is unknown. The 213PTE launched with a $221 MSRP, while the 130UL has no launch price recorded. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is clear. The 130UL uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, representing a 10-core, 12-thread configuration. The 213PTE uses Bartlett Lake architecture with a 8-core, 16-thread configuration. Both are built on a 10 nm Intel process, but the core designs differ in thread allocation.

The 213PTE's Bartlett Lake architecture pairs fewer cores with more threads, suggesting a design that relies on simultaneous multithreading to extract parallelism from each physical core. The 130UL's Raptor Lake architecture uses more physical cores but fewer total threads, indicating a different approach to workload distribution. The L2 cache allocation reinforces this: the 213PTE gives each core 2 MB of L2, while the 130UL gives 1.25 MB. The 213PTE's total L3 cache of 24 MB doubles the 130UL's 12 MB.

The 213PTE's memory subsystem includes a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, which the 130UL lacks in the database. ECC memory support on the 213PTE indicates a server or workstation-oriented feature set, while the 130UL's lack of ECC aligns with a consumer-focused design. The PCIe generation difference is notable: the 213PTE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the 130UL offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes. This gives the 213PTE double the lane count and a newer PCIe generation, affecting bandwidth to GPUs and NVMe storage.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 130UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, a more capable integrated GPU. The 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730, a more modest solution. The 45 W TDP of the 213PTE versus the 15 W TDP of the 130UL reflects the performance-oriented design of the former and the efficiency-oriented design of the latter. The release dates also differ: the 130UL was released in April 2024, while the 213PTE is dated March 2026.

Where Each One Wins

The 213PTE wins in all measured benchmark categories, as it is the only processor with recorded results. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21751 indicates strong parallel throughput, suitable for rendering, video encoding, and compilation workloads. The single-core score of 3070 indicates fast responsiveness for lightly threaded applications. The PassMark multi-thread score of 25590 and single-thread score of 3718 reinforce this dual strength.

Specific PassMark results show where the 213PTE excels. Integer math at 93109 and floating point math at 71722 point to scientific computing and simulation tasks. Data compression at 261083 suggests archive management and database workloads. Data encryption at 14413 covers security-related processing. Extended instructions at 16146 indicate SIMD-heavy applications benefit. Physics at 2199 supports gaming physics calculations. Random string sorting at 30106 helps with sorting algorithms.

The 213PTE's 45 W TDP, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and ECC memory support position it for workstation and content-creation systems where throughput matters. The 83rd percentile ranking confirms it outperforms most CPUs in the database.

The 130UL, with no recorded benchmarks, has no measured wins. Its 15 W TDP and Iris Xe Graphics 80EU suggest it targets low-power desktop or embedded systems where energy efficiency is prioritized over raw performance. The 10-core, 12-thread configuration with a 4.70 GHz boost clock provides more physical cores than the 213PTE, but the database does not show whether this translates into any real-world advantage. The 130UL's PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes and lack of ECC support limit its appeal for workstation use.

The data indicates the 213PTE is the stronger processor for any benchmark-driven comparison. The 130UL's only potential advantage lies in its lower 15 W power draw, but the database records no performance data to validate its capability in that envelope.