Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a split personality between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, but the Intel Core 5 213PE takes the two most dramatic victories. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 213PE scores 22468 against 16467 for the 225F, a 36.4% advantage. The single-core R23 result is even more lopsided: 3172 versus 1893, a 67.6% gap. These are the largest deltas recorded in the entire comparison.

The 225F counters in the other Cinebench iterations. In R15 multi-core it posts 2660 versus 2264, a 14.9% lead. In R20 multi-core the margin is 14.7% (11059 against 9436). The R20 single-core test also favors the 225F at 1561 versus 1332, another 14.7% delta. The R15 single-core test is the only Cinebench variant where the 213PE wins, taking 319 against 287 for an 11.1% edge.

PassMark results reinforce the 225F's overall dominance. Data compression shows 310843 versus 298804, a 3.9% win. Data encryption swings 29.7% in favor of the 225F (22648 against 15916). Extended instructions produce a 30.2% margin (28027 versus 19565). The find prime numbers test is the single largest PassMark gap: 352 versus 114, a 67.6% blowout. Floating point math favors the 225F by 25.9% (92554 against 68587). Physics testing shows a 33.2% lead (2430 versus 1624). Random string sorting adds a 14.2% win (37325 versus 32027). PassMark multi-thread scores 31004 against 26434, a 14.7% margin. Single-thread PassMark gives the 225F a 7.7% edge (4397 versus 4060).

The 213PE's remaining win is in integer math, where it scores 92089 against 66417, a 38.7% advantage. This is the second-largest delta in the entire dataset, trailing only the R23 results. The pattern is clear: the 213PE dominates certain compute-heavy workloads while the 225F wins the broader sweep of tests.

Average benchmark scores summarize the overall picture. The 225F holds an average of 37313 across all recorded benchmarks, while the 213PE averages 35428. Both processors sit at the 85th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The 225F's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HK (37425, 0.3% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H (37161, 0.4% lower). The 213PE's closest competitors are the Intel Core i7-13700T (35403, 0.1% lower) and the Intel Core i7-12700KF (35365, 0.2% lower). These proximity values place both chips in similar overall performance strata despite their divergent workload profiles.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The Core 5 213PE uses Bartlett Lake silicon built on Intel's 10 nm process with the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core Ultra 5 225F is an Arrow Lake-S part, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 family, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node and using Intel Socket 1851. The process node difference is the single largest architectural distinction: 10 nm versus 3 nm, a full two generations of lithography.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The 213PE packs 8 cores and 16 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The 225F uses 10 physical cores but only 10 threads, meaning it lacks SMT entirely. This explains the multi-threaded Cinebench R23 result where the 213PE's 16 threads overwhelm the 225F's 10, despite the latter having two additional physical cores.

Clock speeds favor the 213PE at the top end. Its boost clock reaches 5.20 GHz against 4.90 GHz for the 225F. The base clocks reverse the order: 2.70 GHz for the 213PE and 3.30 GHz for the 225F. Both parts carry a 65 W TDP rating.

Cache hierarchies differ in both size and organization. The 213PE provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The 225F offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The 225F's per-core cache is larger in L1 and L2, but the 213PE holds a 4 MB advantage in total L3 capacity.

Memory support marks another generational split. The 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel access and a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The 225F supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the 213PE but not on the 225F. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 213PE offers Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the 225F provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are present on the 213PE in the form of UHD Graphics 730. The 225F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A. The 225F's transistor count is recorded at 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die; no transistor or die size data is recorded for the 213PE. Both processors are desktop parts in active production. The 213PE carries a launch MSRP of $221, while the 225F lists at $231. Both are multiplier-locked.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 physical cores. The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 physical cores but uses hyper-threading to reach 16 threads, while the 225F is limited to 10 threads.

Q: Why does the Core 5 213PE win Cinebench R23 multi-core by such a large margin?

A: The 213PE scores 22468 against the 225F's 16467, a 36.4% advantage. Its 16 threads, enabled by simultaneous multithreading, combined with a 5.20 GHz boost clock, allow it to outperform the 225F's 10 threads in this heavily threaded test.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 225F outperform the Core 5 213PE in encryption workloads?

A: Yes. The 225F scores 22648 in PassMark data encryption versus 15916 for the 213PE, a 29.7% margin. This aligns with the 225F's broader trend of PassMark wins in 11 of the 13 recorded PassMark tests.

Q: What memory options does each processor support?

A: The Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 225F supports only DDR5 but achieves 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225F averages 37313 across all recorded benchmarks, compared to 35428 for the Core 5 213PE. Both rank at the 85th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Is there an integrated GPU on either processor?

A: The Core 5 213PE includes UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra 5 225F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A in the database.

Q: How does the process node differ between the two?

A: The Core 5 213PE uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 5 225F uses TSMC's 3 nm process, a significant lithography advantage for the newer part.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports two distinct use cases. The Core 5 213PE is the choice for workloads that scale with thread count and high boost clocks. Its 36.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 38.7% lead in PassMark integer math are the defining results. The 16-thread design, 5.20 GHz boost, and 24 MB of L3 cache deliver class-leading performance in those specific tests.

The Core Ultra 5 225F wins the overall average benchmark comparison at 37313 versus 35428. Its dominance across PassMark tests, particularly the 67.6% margin in find prime numbers and the 33.2% lead in physics, indicates strong per-core efficiency from the 3 nm TSMC process. The 10 physical cores without SMT still manage to win multi-threaded tests in R15 and R20, losing only in R23.

The 225F also provides better platform features: 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and newer Socket 1851 compatibility. The 213PE counters with DDR4 support, ECC memory, and integrated graphics, making it more flexible for legacy systems or configurations requiring iGPU output.

Users prioritizing raw multi-threaded rendering performance in Cinebench R23 should select the Core 5 213PE. Users seeking broader all-around performance, stronger encryption, and newer platform features should select the Core Ultra 5 225F. The 85th percentile ranking for both parts confirms they operate in the same overall performance tier despite their divergent architectural approaches.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 225F |

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

| Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Threads | 16 | 10 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | N/A |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $231 |

| Part Number | SA4QG | SRQD2SRVF9 |