Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core 7 251E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Core 5 213PE and the Intel Core 7 251E. The Core 5 213PE has a full set of recorded measurements across Cinebench and Passmark tests, while the Core 7 251E has no benchmark entries in the database. This absence of comparative data means any performance differential must be inferred from the architectural specifications and the Core 5's standing against its nearest rivals.

The Core 5 213PE posts an average benchmark score of 35,428 across all recorded tests. This places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-13700T, scores 35,403, a delta of just 0.1 percent. The Core i7-12700KF follows at 35,365 with a 0.2 percent delta, the Core i5-13600T at 35,305 with a 0.3 percent delta, and the Core i7-12700K at 35,287 with a 0.4 percent delta. These margins are extremely tight, indicating the Core 5 213PE performs within a narrow band of these established desktop processors.

Looking at specific workloads, the Core 5 213PE achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22,468 and a single-core score of 3,172. In Cinebench R20, it records 9,436 multi-core and 1,332 single-core. The Cinebench R15 results show 2,264 multi-core and 319 single-core. Passmark results include a multi-thread score of 26,434, single-thread of 4,060, integer math at 92,089, floating-point math at 68,587, and data compression at 298,804.

The Core 7 251E, by contrast, has zero benchmark entries and an average benchmark score of 0. The database records no wins for either processor in head-to-head testing. The 50th percentile ranking for the Core 7 251E reflects the absence of measured data rather than a performance verdict. Any comparison between these two parts relies entirely on specification analysis, not measured outcomes.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Bartlett Lake codename and are built on Intel's 10 nm process node, produced by Intel's own foundry. Both use the Intel Socket 1700 platform and support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. Both support ECC memory and feature PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are classified as desktop market segments with active production status.

The core configuration differs substantially. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, triple the core count and double the thread count. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 and 2.10 GHz for the Core 7. Boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 5.60 GHz respectively, giving the Core 7 a 0.40 GHz higher maximum frequency despite its lower base clock.

Cache hierarchies show similar per-core allocations but different total capacities. Both parts use 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache is 24 MB on the Core 5 and 36 MB on the Core 7, a 12 MB difference. The die size is recorded only for the Core 7 at 257 mm²; the Core 5 has no die size entry. The Core 7 also carries a longer part number, SRQDUQ657, versus SA4QG for the Core 5.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 213PE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 7 251E includes UHD Graphics 770. Memory bandwidth is rated at 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 and 89.6 GB/s for the Core 7, a 12.8 GB/s advantage for the larger part. Release dates are separated by about 14 months: the Core 7 251E launched on 2025-01-12, and the Core 5 213PE launched on 2026-03-08.

The launch MSRP for the Core 5 213PE is $221. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 251E is $384.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Core 5 213PE is a measured, verified performer with an 85th percentile standing and an average score of 35,428. It sits within 0.4 percent of four established Intel desktop processors, meaning its real-world performance is essentially on par with chips like the Core i7-13700T and Core i7-12700K. The Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmarks, so the database cannot validate its performance claims. Its 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder for missing data, not a performance assessment.

For workloads represented by the Core 5's benchmark suite, the Core 5 213PE delivers strong multi-threaded and single-threaded results. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22,468 and Passmark multi-thread score of 26,434 indicate capable parallel processing. The single-thread score of 4,060 in Passmark and 3,172 in Cinebench R23 show solid per-core performance, aided by the 5.20 GHz boost clock.

The Core 7 251E offers a larger core count, higher boost clock, more L3 cache, higher memory bandwidth, and a newer integrated graphics solution. The 24-core, 32-thread configuration suggests potential for heavily parallel workloads, and the 5.60 GHz boost clock indicates strong single-thread capability on paper. But without benchmark data, these specifications remain unverified in the database.

Users who require measured performance evidence should lean toward the Core 5 213PE. Users who prioritize the Core 7's raw specification advantages and are willing to accept unverified performance may consider the Core 7 251E. The data does not support a definitive performance winner because the Core 7 has no recorded scores.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

| Field | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core 7 251E |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 8 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 32 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| Die size | Not recorded | 257 mm² |

| L3 cache | 24 MB shared | 36 MB shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Release date | 2026-03-08 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $384 |

| Part number | SA4QG | SRQDUQ657 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 85 | 50 |

| Average benchmark score | 35,428 | 0 |

All other recorded specifications are identical: Intel Socket 1700, 10 nm process, Intel foundry, Bartlett Lake codename, DDR4/DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, locked multiplier, desktop segment, and active production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the base clock difference between the two?

A: The Core 5 213PE has a base clock of 2.70 GHz. The Core 7 251E has a base clock of 2.10 GHz, which is 0.60 GHz lower.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 251E boosts to 5.60 GHz. The Core 5 213PE boosts to 5.20 GHz, a 0.40 GHz difference.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Core 5 213PE has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 251E has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, a 12 MB advantage.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core 5 213PE and the Core 7 251E support ECC memory.

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

A: The Core 5 213PE has an average benchmark score of 35,428. The Core 7 251E has an average benchmark score of 0, because no benchmark entries are recorded for it in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 213PE wins in measured performance. It has a complete benchmark profile with an 85th percentile ranking, and its average score of 35,428 places it within 0.4 percent of the Core i7-13700T, Core i7-12700KF, Core i5-13600T, and Core i7-12700K. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22,468 and Passmark multi-thread score of 26,434 demonstrate verified parallel processing capability. Its single-thread Passmark score of 4,060 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,172 show strong per-core performance. Its lower launch MSRP of $221, compared to $384 for the Core 7, is a recorded advantage, though pricing analysis is outside the scope of this data.

The Core 7 251E wins on paper specifications. Its 24 cores and 32 threads provide triple the core count and double the thread count of the Core 5. Its 5.60 GHz boost clock is higher, its 36 MB L3 cache is larger, its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is greater, and its UHD Graphics 770 is a more advanced integrated solution than the UHD Graphics 730. Its 257 mm² die size is recorded, while the Core 5's is not. The Core 7 also has a lower base clock of 2.10 GHz, which may indicate a different power distribution strategy across its larger core array.

The database shows no head-to-head benchmark wins for either processor. The Core 5's recorded results give it an empirical edge in any workload covered by the benchmark suite. The Core 7's specifications suggest potential advantages in heavily threaded scenarios, but the absence of measurement data means that potential is unconfirmed. The percentile ranking of 50 for the Core 7, versus 85 for the Core 5, reflects this data gap rather than a direct comparison. Users seeking verified results should rely on the Core 5's benchmark scores. Users willing to accept unverified specifications may find the Core 7's core count and cache capacity attractive for parallel workloads. The data cannot confirm which processor is faster in any specific application because the Core 7 has no recorded scores to analyze.