Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core 9 270H Comparison

The Intel Core 5 213PE and Intel Core 9 270H present a fascinating split in the database. The 213PE, a desktop part on Socket 1700, and the 270H, a mobile part on BGA 1744, trade significant victories across different workload types. The data reveals a processor that wins on raw single-threaded performance in one corner, and a multi-threaded workhorse in the other, with a few surprising reversals in between.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence appears in the Cinebench suite. The Intel Core 5 213PE dominates the newer Cinebench R23 tests, scoring 22468 in multicore compared to the 270H's 18000, a massive 24.8% advantage. The single-core gap is even more pronounced, with the 213PE posting 3172 against the 270H's 2040, a 55.5% lead. This suggests the desktop chip's architecture excels in the sustained, high-frequency workloads that R23 represents.

However, the older Cinebench R15 and R20 tests tell a different story. The 270H wins all four of these benchmarks by a consistent 8.1% margin. In R15 multicore, the 270H scores 2464 versus 2264, and in R20 multicore it posts 10268 against 9436. The single-core results mirror this, with the 270H leading 347 to 319 in R15 and 1449 to 1332 in R20. This inconsistency between Cinebench versions is curious, suggesting the two processors respond very differently to the specific instruction mixes and scaling behaviors of each test.

PassMark results largely favor the 270H. The mobile chip wins 10 of the 12 PassMark comparisons. Its largest margins come in data encryption (19369 vs 15916, a 17.8% advantage) and physics (1966 vs 1624, a 17.4% lead). Data compression shows a 10.5% edge (333785 vs 298804), while random string sorting favors the 270H by 13.1% (36867 vs 32027). More moderate wins appear in integer math (97654 vs 92089, 5.7%), floating point math (70640 vs 68587, 2.9%), extended instructions (20079 vs 19565, 2.6%), and multithread (28764 vs 26434, 8.1%).

The 213PE claims two PassMark victories. It wins single-thread with a score of 4060 against the 270H's 3944, a 2.9% edge that aligns with its Cinebench R23 single-core dominance. It also edges out the 270H in find prime numbers, 114 to 112, a 1.8% win that represents the narrowest margin in the entire comparison. Overall, the 270H takes 12 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the 213PE secures 5.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share a 10 nm process node from Intel, but diverge sharply in their configurations. The Core 5 213PE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core 9 270H uses Raptor Lake-H, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. The 213PE packs 8 cores and 16 threads, whereas the 270H scales up to 14 cores and 20 threads. This core count advantage likely explains the 270H's wins in heavily parallel PassMark workloads like data compression and encryption.

Cache layouts are identical in structure: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus. The 213PE lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the 270H's bandwidth figure is not recorded in the database. ECC memory support marks another key split, with the 213PE supporting it and the 270H lacking it.

PCIe lanes differ substantially. The 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 270H offers Gen 5 with just 8 lanes. Integrated graphics also separate the two: the 213PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the 270H steps up to Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The 213PE has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The 270H matches the 2.70 GHz base but boosts higher to 5.80 GHz. Thermal design power runs opposite to the core counts, with the 213PE rated at 65 W and the 270H at 45 W. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two distinct usage profiles. The Intel Core 5 213PE delivers its strongest results in single-threaded and certain multicore scenarios. Its 55.5% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 24.8% lead in R23 multicore are the largest advantages seen in the entire comparison. The chip also holds a 2.9% edge in PassMark single-thread. This processor sits at the 85th percentile against all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 35428. Its closest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700T, which trails by just 0.1%, and the Intel Core i7-12700KF at 0.2% behind.

The Intel Core 9 270H counters with broader multi-threaded strength. Its 14 cores and 20 threads drive wins across data compression, encryption, physics, integer math, and floating point math. The chip reaches the 86th percentile with an average score of 38335, placing it just ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H by 0.1% and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 by 0.3%. The 270H's Cinebench R15 and R20 sweeps by 8.1% confirm consistent performance in those specific render tests, even as its R23 results fall behind.

The desktop-oriented 213PE appears tuned for tasks where single-thread speed and high sustained clocks matter most. The mobile 270H, despite its lower 45 W TDP, uses its extra cores to win the majority of the benchmark suite. The 213PE's 65 W TDP and 16 PCIe lanes suggest a system built for expansion and stability, while the 270H's 8 lanes and BGA socket point toward a compact, integrated design. Users prioritizing Cinebench R23 performance or single-thread responsiveness would favor the 213PE. Those needing maximum throughput in encryption, compression, and physics simulations would lean toward the 270H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 9 270H leads with an average benchmark score of 38335, compared to the Intel Core 5 213PE's 35428.

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

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 3172, which is 55.5% higher than the 270H's 2040.

Q: Does the Intel Core 9 270H win every benchmark?

A: No, the 270H wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head tests, but the 213PE wins 5, including Cinebench R23 multicore and single-core, PassMark single-thread, and PassMark find prime numbers.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each chip?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel Core 5 213PE supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 9 270H does not.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor share?

A: Both the Intel Core 5 213PE and the Intel Core 9 270H feature 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 213PE claims victory in Cinebench R23 multicore and single-core, PassMark single-thread, and PassMark find prime numbers. Its 24.8% multicore lead and 55.5% single-core lead in R23 suggest a processor that excels in modern render workloads and lightly threaded applications. The 2.9% PassMark single-thread win reinforces this strength.

The Intel Core 9 270H wins in Cinebench R15 and R20, both multicore and single-core, plus PassMark data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting. Its largest wins, 17.8% in encryption and 17.4% in physics, point to strong performance in security, simulation, and compression tasks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core 9 270H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.80 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-H |

| Generation | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) | Core 9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| ECC Memory | Supported | Not supported |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-12-17 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $697 |