Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core i9-12900HX Comparison

The Intel Core 5 213PE and the Intel Core i9-12900HX are two very different processors that happen to sit close in overall benchmark averages. The data shows the Core i9-12900HX wins the majority of head-to-head tests, taking 13 of 17, while the Core 5 213PE wins 4. However, the nature of those wins tells a clear story about which chip suits which workload. The Core i9-12900HX is the multi-threaded powerhouse, while the Core 5 213PE is the single-thread specialist, making the choice between them entirely dependent on whether the priority is parallel throughput or raw per-core speed.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data, the Intel Core i9-12900HX is the pick for users who need maximum multi-core performance. It leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core by 36.5%, in R20 multi-core by 19.8%, and in R23 multi-core by 2.9%. Its advantage extends across PassMark's parallel workloads, including data compression (25.4% ahead), data encryption (30.6% ahead), and multithread (20.3% ahead). The Core 5 213PE is the pick for users who prioritize single-core speed. It wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 14.7%, R23 single-core by a massive 65.9%, and PassMark single-thread by 8.4%. The overall score gap between them is tiny—the Core 5 213PE averages 35428 versus 35003 for the Core i9-12900HX, a difference of about 1.2%—but the distribution of wins is lopsided. For a desktop user running heavily threaded applications, the Core i9-12900HX is the stronger choice. For a user whose software relies on single-core performance, the Core 5 213PE is the better option despite its lower core count.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on the same 10 nm process node and use the same Intel foundry, but their underlying designs diverge significantly. The Core 5 213PE is a desktop part from the Bartlett Lake generation, socketed into Intel Socket 1700. The Core i9-12900HX is a mobile part from the Alder Lake-HX generation, using Intel BGA 1964. The Core i9-12900HX has double the cores, with 16 versus 8, and 24 threads versus 16. The per-core L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core, but the L2 cache differs: the Core 5 213PE has 2 MB per core, while the Core i9-12900HX has 1.25 MB per core. The shared L3 cache favors the Core i9-12900HX, which has 30 MB compared to 24 MB. The die size for the Core i9-12900HX is 215 mm², while the Core 5 213PE has no listed die size. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, and both support ECC memory. The Core 5 213PE lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core i9-12900HX has no listed bandwidth. PCIe lanes favor the Core i9-12900HX with Gen 5 and 20 lanes, versus Gen 5 and 16 lanes for the Core 5 213PE. The integrated graphics are slightly different: UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 213PE versus UHD Graphics 770 on the Core i9-12900HX. The Core i9-12900HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 213PE does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results reveal a split personality. In R15 multi-core, the Core i9-12900HX scores 3566 against 2264, a 36.5% lead. In R20 multi-core, it scores 11764 against 9436, a 19.8% lead. The R23 multi-core test is closer: 23150 versus 22468, a 2.9% lead for the Core i9-12900HX. Single-core results are where the Core 5 213PE takes command. In R15 single-core, it scores 319 versus 278, a 14.7% win. In R23 single-core, it scores 3172 versus 1912.5, a striking 65.9% win. Notably, the R20 single-core test goes the other way, with the Core i9-12900HX scoring 1660 versus 1332, a 19.8% lead. This inconsistency is odd, but the R23 single-core result stands out as the largest margin in either direction. PassMark results are consistently in favor of the Core i9-12900HX across all multi-threaded workloads. Data compression: 400636 versus 298804, a 25.4% lead. Data encryption: 22932 versus 15916, a 30.6% lead. Extended instructions: 24315 versus 19565, a 19.5% lead. Find prime numbers: 132 versus 114, a 13.6% lead. Floating point math: 84410 versus 68587, an 18.7% lead. Integer math: 113416 versus 92089, an 18.8% lead. Multithread: 33158 versus 26434, a 20.3% lead. Physics: 2012 versus 1624, a 19.3% lead. Random string sorting: 43877 versus 32027, a 27% lead. The only PassMark win for the Core 5 213PE is single-thread, where it scores 4060 versus 3745, an 8.4% advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-12900HX has 16 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core 5 213PE leads by 65.9%, scoring 3172 versus 1912.5.

Q: Which processor is better for multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-12900HX wins every multi-threaded benchmark in the data, including Cinebench R15 multi-core by 36.5%, R20 multi-core by 19.8%, and PassMark multithread by 20.3%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 5 213PE and the Intel Core i9-12900HX list ECC memory support as true.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core i9-12900HX has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has an average benchmark score of 35428, while the Intel Core i9-12900HX has an average of 35003. The Core 5 213PE also has a slightly higher percentile rank at 85 versus 84.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-12900HX wins in all scenarios that scale with core count and thread count. It is the clear choice for heavily parallel tasks such as video rendering, data compression, and encryption. Its wins in PassMark data compression (25.4% ahead), data encryption (30.6% ahead), and multithread (20.3% ahead) point to strong performance in content creation and scientific workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core win, though narrower at 2.9%, still confirms its advantage in long-duration rendering tasks. The Core i9-12900HX also leads in integer math (18.8% ahead) and floating point math (18.7% ahead), suggesting broad strength in general compute. The Intel Core 5 213PE wins in single-thread performance, which is critical for older software, lightly threaded games, and applications where per-core speed is the bottleneck. Its 65.9% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the most dramatic gap in the entire comparison. The PassMark single-thread win of 8.4% and the Cinebench R15 single-core win of 14.7% support this pattern. For users running productivity software that uses one or two cores, the Core 5 213PE will feel faster. The data also shows the Core 5 213PE has a higher boost clock at 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, which helps explain its single-core edge. The Core 5 213PE is a desktop part, so it is likely easier to integrate into a stationary system, while the Core i9-12900HX is a mobile part, designed for laptops and other portable devices. The unlocked multiplier on the Core i9-12900HX offers overclocking headroom, but the Core 5 213PE's locked multiplier means it runs at stock settings.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every major specification. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores, while the Core i9-12900HX has 16 cores. Threads are 16 versus 24. Base clock is 2.70 GHz on the Core 5 213PE and 2.30 GHz on the Core i9-12900HX. Boost clock is 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. TDP is 65 W versus 55 W. The socket is Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 1964. The generation is Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) versus Core i9 (Alder Lake-HX). The L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache is 24 MB shared versus 30 MB shared. Memory bandwidth is listed only for the Core 5 213PE at 76.8 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 16 versus 20, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus UHD Graphics 770. The Core 5 213PE has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core i9-12900HX has a launch MSRP of $606. The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 213PE and unlocked on the Core i9-12900HX. The release dates are also different, with the Core 5 213PE releasing on 2026-03-08 and the Core i9-12900HX releasing on 2022-05-09.