Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison
Intel Core 5 210H
Core Ultra 7 270K Plus
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The benchmark data presents a one-sided comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core 5 210H taking zero wins. The margin is substantial across every workload category, but the scale of the advantage varies significantly depending on the test.
The largest gap appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 615, while the Core 5 210H scores 53. That is a 91.4% deficit for the mobile chip, the widest margin recorded in the entire comparison. This test is heavily dependent on integer throughput and core count, and the 24-core desktop part simply overwhelms the 8-core mobile part.
Data encryption shows a 79.4% gap. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 59097, compared to 12187 for the Core 5 210H. Encryption workloads scale well with core count and memory bandwidth, both areas where the desktop processor holds a clear structural advantage. Extended instructions follow a similar pattern, with the Ultra 7 scoring 63506 against 13370, a 78.9% deficit. Floating point math is another lopsided result: 229491 versus 45057, or 80.4% behind. This confirms the desktop part is not just faster in multi-threaded integer work but also in floating point throughput.
The Cinebench suite shows consistent multi-core dominance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 44253 against 11830, a 73.3% gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 24461 versus 6504, a 73.4% gap, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 6656 versus 1757, a 73.6% gap. The consistency of these margins across different Cinebench versions suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-specific.
Single-core performance tells a different story in terms of margin. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus still wins, but by a much smaller amount. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 7 scores 2439 against 1771, a 27.4% advantage. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 3453 versus 918, a 73.4% gap, which is an outlier compared to the other single-core results. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 354 versus 247, a 30.2% gap. PassMark single thread shows 5068 versus 3539, also a 30.2% gap. The R20 single-core result is anomalous relative to the other single-core tests, but the overall pattern remains: the Ultra 7 has a meaningful but smaller lead in single-threaded work compared to its multi-threaded dominance.
PassMark multithread shows 68574 versus 18252, a 73.4% gap. Random string sorting shows 96945 versus 23451, a 75.8% gap. Data compression shows 804322 versus 217805, a 72.9% gap. Integer math shows 175986 versus 61503, a 65.1% gap, which is actually the smallest multi-threaded margin recorded outside of single-core tests. Physics shows 4064 versus 1040, a 74.4% gap. The overall PassMark multithread score of 18252 for the Core 5 210H places it at the 77th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus sits at the 96th percentile.
The average benchmark score difference is stark. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785, while the Core 5 210H averages 24872. That is roughly a 3.8x difference in overall measured performance. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 210H include the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24911 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX at 24822 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-11850H at 24935 (0.3% ahead). The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, by contrast, sits near the AMD EPYC 6520P at 93786 (0% delta) and the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95183 (1.5% ahead). The two processors occupy entirely different performance tiers.
The Verdict
The data supports a clear split between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is in a different performance class entirely. Its average benchmark score of 93785 versus 24872, combined with a 96th percentile ranking versus 77th, means the desktop part is the correct choice for any workload where raw compute throughput is the priority. The 24 cores, 24 threads, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache give it a structural advantage that no amount of mobile tuning can overcome.
The Intel Core 5 210H is a mobile processor with 8 cores, 12 threads, and a 45 W TDP. Its performance profile is competitive within its own segment, as shown by its nearest rivals being the Core i7-13620H and Ryzen 9 5900HX, all within 0.4% of each other. But against the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, it loses every single recorded benchmark. The smallest deficit is 27.4% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and the largest is 91.4% in find prime numbers.
The launch MSRP of the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is $299, and the launch MSRP of the Core 5 210H is $342. The desktop part is less expensive at launch while delivering dramatically higher performance. The Core 5 210H carries a higher launch MSRP despite being slower in every measured test.
The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the only rational choice for desktop builders who need maximum performance. The Core 5 210H exists for a different purpose: mobile systems where the 45 W TDP and BGA 1744 socket are requirements. The data does not support using the Core 5 210H in any scenario where the Ultra 7 could be installed instead.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core 5 210H wins zero benchmarks in this comparison. There is no recorded test where it outperforms the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. However, its intended use case is not raw performance. It is a mobile processor with a 45 W TDP, designed for laptops and compact systems where power draw and thermal output are constrained. Its 8 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for mainstream mobile workloads, and its 77th percentile ranking places it above the majority of all recorded CPUs.
The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins in every category measured. Single-core Cinebench R23 shows a 27.4% advantage, which is the smallest margin. Multi-core workloads show margins between 65.1% and 73.6%. The largest margins appear in encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, and prime number finding, where the desktop part is between 78.9% and 91.4% ahead. The Ultra 7 also has an unlocked multiplier, a 125 W TDP, and support for DDR5 memory with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, all of which contribute to its performance ceiling.
The use-case split is therefore not about benchmark wins. It is about platform constraints. The Core 5 210H fits mobile sockets and power envelopes. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus fits desktop sockets and high-performance builds. The benchmark data simply confirms that within their respective platforms, the Ultra 7 is overwhelmingly faster.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785, while the Intel Core 5 210H has an average of 24872.
Q: How much faster is the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus in Cinebench R23 multi-core?
A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 44253, compared to 11830 for the Core 5 210H, a 73.3% advantage.
Q: What is the smallest performance gap between the two processors?
A: The smallest gap is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 2439 against 1771, a 27.4% advantage.
Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?
A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 615 against 53, a 91.4% advantage.
Q: How does the Core 5 210H compare to its nearest rivals?
A: The Core 5 210H has a -0.2% delta versus the Intel Core i7-13620H, a 0.2% delta versus the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, a -0.3% delta versus the Intel Core i7-11850H, and a -0.4% delta versus the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F.
Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 210H does not.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural generations and use different manufacturing processes. The Intel Core 5 210H is built on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-H variant, and is part of the Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. It uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, with the codename Arrow Lake Refresh, and uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC. The Ultra 7 has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5 210H has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.
The core configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with fewer performance cores than total threads. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 5 210H has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3.
The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Memory support diverges: the Core 5 210H supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 only. The Ultra 7 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the Core 5 210H has no memory bandwidth figure recorded.
PCIe capabilities also differ. The Core 5 210H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 7 also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 210H does not.
Specification Differences
The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks differ: the Core 5 210H runs at 2.20 GHz, and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus runs at 3.70 GHz. Boost clocks differ: 4.80 GHz for the Core 5 210H, 5.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. TDP is 45 W for the mobile part and 125 W for the desktop part.
The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 210H uses Intel BGA 1744, a mobile socket. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket. The process node is 10 nm (Intel) for the Core 5 210H and 3 nm (TSMC) for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Transistor count is not recorded for the Core 5 210H, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus lists 17,800 million. Die size is not recorded for the Core 5 210H, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus lists 243 mm².
Cache configurations differ at every level. L1 is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 is 12 MB shared versus 36 MB shared. Memory support: the Core 5 210H supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 only. ECC memory is not supported on the Core 5 210H but is supported on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. PCIe lanes from the CPU are 8 for the Core 5 210H and 20 for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, both Gen 5.
Integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe Graphics 48EU for the Core 5 210H, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 210H and unlocked on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Market segments differ: Mobile for the Core 5 210H, Desktop for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Release dates differ: 2024-12-17 for the Core 5 210H, 2026-03-10 for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Launch MSRP is $342 for the Core 5 210H and $299 for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.