Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every single matchup. The Intel Core 5 210H does not claim a single benchmark victory in the database.

The largest margin appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 against the Core 5 210H's 53, a delta of -89.1 percent. This is a massive gap that reflects the desktop chip's far higher core count and newer architecture. In floating point math, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus delivers 162,692 versus 45,057, a -72.3 percent delta. Data encryption shows 42,144 against 12,187, or -71.1 percent. Physics testing results in 3,494 versus 1,040, a -70.2 percent delta. Extended instructions scores 44,565 against 13,370, or -70 percent.

In the Cinebench suite, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads multi-core workloads by similar proportions. Cinebench R15 multi-core scores 4,640 versus 1,757, a -62.1 percent delta. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 18,442 against 6,504, a -64.7 percent delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core results in 30,867 versus 11,830, a -61.7 percent delta. The single-core Cinebench tests show a smaller but still significant gap: R15 single-core is 328 versus 247 (-24.7 percent), R20 single-core is 2,603 versus 918 (-64.7 percent), and R23 single-core is 2,261 versus 1,771 (-21.7 percent).

PassMark integer math shows 125,091 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus against 61,503 for the Core 5 210H, a -50.8 percent delta. Random string sorting scores 69,090 versus 23,451, a -66.1 percent delta. Data compression delivers 568,721 against 217,805, a -61.7 percent delta. PassMark multi-thread scores 51,596 versus 18,252, a -64.6 percent delta. PassMark single-thread results in 4,757 versus 3,539, a -25.6 percent delta.

The average benchmark score confirms the overall picture: the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus averages 66,855, while the Core 5 210H averages 24,872. This places the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs tested, while the Core 5 210H sits in the 77th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The data does not present any workload category where the Intel Core 5 210H outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Every recorded test, from single-threaded Cinebench R15 to multi-core PassMark physics, favors the desktop part.

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is strongest in heavily parallel workloads. Its multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 30,867 is about 2.6 times the Core 5 210H's 11,830. PassMark multi-thread shows a similar ratio: 51,596 versus 18,252. The desktop chip also excels in arithmetic-heavy tasks: integer math scores 125,091, floating point math scores 162,692, and data compression scores 568,721. These are workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth, and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has clear advantages in both.

Single-threaded performance also favors the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, though by a smaller margin. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,261 versus 1,771, a 21.7 percent lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4,757 versus 3,539, a 25.6 percent lead. This indicates the desktop chip's higher boost clock and newer architecture deliver measurable benefits even in lightly threaded tasks.

The Core 5 210H remains a functional mobile processor, but the database shows no test where it closes the gap. Its strongest relative showing is in single-core workloads, where the delta drops to roughly 21 to 25 percent. In multi-core tests, the delta typically ranges from 50 to 89 percent. Users running heavy rendering, simulation, or data processing workloads would see the largest practical differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus averages 66,855, while the Intel Core 5 210H averages 24,872. The desktop chip also ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 77th percentile for the mobile chip.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 30,867 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core 5 210H scores 11,830. This represents a -61.7 percent delta in favor of the desktop part.

Q: Is the Core 5 210H competitive in single-threaded tests?

A: The Core 5 210H trails in all single-core tests but by smaller margins. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1,771 versus 2,261 (-21.7 percent), and PassMark single-thread shows 3,539 versus 4,757 (-25.6 percent). The gap narrows but does not reverse.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 versus 53 for the Core 5 210H, a -89.1 percent delta.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus have more cores and threads?

A: Yes. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads. The desktop chip also has a higher base clock of 4.20 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 4.80 GHz.

Q: How do the two processors compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports dual-channel DDR5 with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core 5 210H also supports dual-channel memory (DDR4 and DDR5), but the database does not list a memory bandwidth figure for it.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every physical and electrical specification in the database.

The Core 5 210H is a mobile part with 8 cores and 12 threads, a base clock of 2.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. It has a TDP of 45 watts and uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop part with 18 cores and 18 threads, a base clock of 4.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Its TDP is 125 watts, and it uses the Intel Socket 1851.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 210H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with a listed bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported on the Core 5 210H, but it is supported on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

PCIe connectivity differs substantially. The Core 5 210H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 210H and unlocked on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. The Core 5 210H launched with an MSRP of $342, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus launched with an MSRP of $199. The Core 5 210H released on December 17, 2024, and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus released on March 10, 2026. Both parts are listed as active in production.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between the two processors is substantial, reflecting different generations, nodes, and design philosophies.

The Core 5 210H is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-H variant, and belongs to the Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. It uses a 10 nm process node manufactured by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is built on Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, belongs to the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation, and uses a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC. The database records the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus as containing 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; no transistor or die size data is listed for the Core 5 210H.

Cache configurations differ sharply. The Core 5 210H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core caches and more than double the L3 capacity give the desktop chip a significant advantage in workloads that benefit from data locality.

The Core 5 210H uses a hybrid core arrangement with 8 physical cores and 12 threads, indicating the presence of efficiency cores without a one-to-one thread mapping. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, meaning every core is a performance core with no simultaneous multithreading. This is a fundamental design difference: the desktop chip relies on raw core count, while the mobile chip uses a mix of performance and efficiency cores.

The integrated graphics also represent different generations. The Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 EU, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU. The newer Arc graphics architecture and higher EU count suggest better iGPU performance for the desktop part, though the database does not include separate graphics benchmarks.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus outperforms the Intel Core 5 210H in every single benchmark test in the database, with win count of 17 to 0. The average benchmark score of 66,855 versus 24,872 places the desktop part in the 93rd percentile while the mobile part sits in the 77th percentile.

For users who need multi-core throughput, the choice is clear. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 61.7 percent lead for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, and PassMark multi-thread shows a 64.6 percent lead. The desktop chip also holds a 50.8 percent advantage in integer math and a 72.3 percent advantage in floating point math. These are the workloads that dominate rendering, scientific computing, and data processing.

For single-threaded tasks, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus still wins, but the margin shrinks to roughly 21 to 25 percent. This means the Core 5 210H is not irrelevant in lightly threaded applications, but it remains behind.

The Core 5 210H is a mobile processor with a 45 watt TDP, BGA 1744 socket, and support for DDR4 and DDR5. It targets laptops and compact systems where power draw and socket size matter. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop processor with a 125 watt TDP, Socket 1851, DDR5-only support, and an unlocked multiplier. It targets full-size desktop builds where performance and overclocking headroom take priority.

The nearest rival data reinforces the positioning. The Core 5 210H sits within 0.4 percent of chips like the Intel Core i7-13620H, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, and Intel Core i7-11850H. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus sits within 1.1 percent of parts like the AMD EPYC 4465P, Intel Xeon 6515P, and Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX. These are different performance strata entirely.

Buyers should pick the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus for any desktop build where benchmark performance is the priority. Buyers should pick the Core 5 210H only when the mobile form factor and 45 watt power envelope are mandatory requirements. There is no workload in the database where the mobile chip offers an advantage.