Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core 5 210H. The average benchmark score of the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is 79,574, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs tracked. The Core 5 210H averages 24,872 and sits in the 77th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus include the Intel Core i9-14900KF (average score 79,371, a 0.3% advantage for the Ultra 9) and the Intel Core i9-14900K (average score 79,097, a 0.6% advantage), which positions it firmly in desktop-class performance territory despite being a mobile part. The Core 5 210H competes with the Intel Core i7-13620H (average score 24,911, a 0.2% advantage for the rival) and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (average score 24,822, a 0.2% advantage for the Core 5), indicating it is a mid-range mobile processor.

The verdict from the data: the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is for workloads that demand maximum multi-threaded throughput, heavy data encryption, or extensive floating-point math. The Core 5 210H, while slower in every measured category, still occupies a usable performance tier for single-threaded tasks as indicated by its R23 single-core score of 1,771 versus the Ultra 9's 2,356. The Core 5 210H also offers a lower power envelope at 45 W TDP versus 55 W, and supports DDR4 memory, which the Ultra 9 does not. However, there is no benchmark category where the Core 5 210H leads, so the selection logic rests entirely on power constraints, memory compatibility, and platform cost, not on performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and are fabricated on different nodes. The Core 5 210H uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-H codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename under the Core Ultra Series 2 family, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node. The transistor count for the Ultra 9 is 17,800 million, and the die size is 243 mm². The Core 5 210H does not have recorded transistor or die size data.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Ultra 9's thread count equals its core count, which indicates a design without hyper-threading on the performance cores, whereas the Core 5 uses 8 cores with 12 threads, implying 4 performance cores with hyper-threading and 4 efficiency cores. Cache hierarchies also differ: the Core 5 has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Ultra 9 has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3.

Clock speeds are higher on the Ultra 9: base clock of 2.70 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, and boost clock of 5.50 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. The TDP is 55 W for the Ultra 9 and 45 W for the Core 5. Socket compatibility is different: the Core 5 uses Intel BGA 1744, the Ultra 9 uses Intel BGA 2114. The Ultra 9 has an unlocked multiplier, the Core 5 does not. The Ultra 9 supports ECC memory, the Core 5 does not. Memory support: the Core 5 supports DDR4 and DDR5, the Ultra 9 supports only DDR5. The Ultra 9 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; the Core 5 has no such figure. PCIe lanes differ: the Core 5 has Gen 5 with 8 CPU-only lanes, the Ultra 9 has Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes. Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 uses Iris Xe Graphics 48EU, the Ultra 9 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speed?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Core 5 210H boosts to 4.80 GHz. The base clocks are 2.70 GHz and 2.20 GHz respectively.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 5 210H supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports only DDR5. The Ultra 9 also has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory, which the Core 5 does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score and percentile ranking?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an average benchmark score of 79,574 and sits in the 95th percentile. The Core 5 210H has an average score of 24,872 and sits in the 77th percentile.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a TDP of 55 W. The Core 5 210H has a TDP of 45 W.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 36 MB shared L3 cache. The Core 5 210H has 12 MB shared L3 cache.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors, based on the recorded data:

• Cores: 8 (Core 5 210H) vs 24 (Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus)
• Threads: 12 vs 24
• Base Clock: 2.20 GHz vs 2.70 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.80 GHz vs 5.50 GHz
• TDP: 45 W vs 55 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1744 vs Intel BGA 2114
• Codename: Raptor Lake-H vs Arrow Lake-HX Refresh
• Generation: Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) vs Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX)
• Process Node: 10 nm (Intel) vs 3 nm (TSMC)
• Foundry: Intel vs TSMC
• Transistors: Not recorded vs 17,800 million
• Die Size: Not recorded vs 243 mm²
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core vs 192 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 2 MB per core vs 3 MB per core
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared vs 36 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4, DDR5 vs DDR5 only
• Memory Bandwidth: Not recorded vs 102.4 GB/s
• ECC Memory: False vs True
• PCIe: Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) vs Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated Graphics: Iris Xe Graphics 48EU vs Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU
• Release Date: 2024-12-17 vs 2026-03-16
• Launch MSRP: $342 vs Not recorded
• Multiplier Unlocked: False vs True
• Part Number: SRQ6RQ5MN vs SADSS

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins every recorded benchmark. The largest margin of victory appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 9 scores 519 versus 53, a delta of 89.8% in favor of the Ultra 9. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ultra 9 scores 2,356 versus the Core 5's 1,771, a 24.8% advantage. Single-thread performance differences are consistent across tests: PassMark single-thread shows 4,951 versus 3,539, a 28.5% lead, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 340 versus 247, a 27.4% lead.

Multi-threaded workloads show even larger gaps. Cinebench R23 multi-core results are 39,684 for the Ultra 9 versus 11,830 for the Core 5, a 70.2% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 21,198 versus 6,504, a 69.3% gap, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5,981 versus 1,757, a 70.6% gap. PassMark multi-thread follows the same pattern: 59,439 versus 18,252, a 69.3% advantage. PassMark physics records 3,387 versus 1,040, also a 69.3% gap.

Data-oriented workloads reinforce the multi-thread dominance. PassMark data compression scores 658,724 for the Ultra 9 versus 217,805 for the Core 5, a 66.9% advantage. Data encryption shows 50,008 versus 12,187, a 75.6% gap, which is one of the larger deltas. Extended instructions record 51,290 versus 13,370, a 73.9% gap. Integer math scores 164,839 versus 61,503, a 62.7% advantage, while floating-point math scores 201,773 versus 45,057, a 77.7% gap. Random string sorting completes the list with 80,327 versus 23,451, a 70.8% advantage.

The data confirms that the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is not merely faster in a single dimension. It leads by roughly 25% to 30% in single-threaded tests, and by 63% to 90% in multi-threaded and specialized workloads. The Core 5 210H's nearest rivals (Intel Core i7-13620H, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX) are within 0.4% of its average score, while the Ultra 9's nearest rivals (Intel Core i9-14900KF, AMD EPYC 7413, Intel Core i9-14900K, Intel Xeon w5-2565X) are within 1.4% of its average score, which places the Ultra 9 in a performance class comparable to desktop flagship processors. The recorded benchmark suite indicates that the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus delivers between 2.6x and 9.8x the performance of the Core 5 210H in the specific tests where such ratios can be derived, with the largest ratio in find prime numbers and the smallest in single-core Cinebench R23.