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

The Intel Core 5 213PE and Intel Core Ultra 5 225H target completely different platforms: the former is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with a 65 W TDP, while the latter is a mobile chip on Intel BGA 2049 with a 28 W TDP. The benchmark data shows a clear split: the Core 5 213PE wins 5 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Core Ultra 5 225H wins 12. However, the nature of those wins matters more than the count. The Core 5 213PE delivers massive leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core (53.6%) and single-core (61.1%), plus integer math (34.4%), making it the stronger choice for sustained CPU-heavy desktop workloads. The Core Ultra 5 225H counters with wins in encryption, floating-point math, physics, and extended instructions, though its margins are generally smaller. The Core 5 213PE also holds a higher percentile ranking (85th vs. 82nd) and a higher average benchmark score (35428 vs. 31508).

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct buyers. The Intel Core 5 213PE suits anyone building a desktop tower where power draw and cooling are less constrained. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22468 versus 14629.5 for the Core Ultra 5 225H is a 53.6% advantage, directly reflecting its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz and its larger 24 MB shared L3 cache versus 18 MB. Single-core performance also favors the Core 5 213PE by 61.1% in Cinebench R23 (3172 vs. 1969), which is a decisive edge for lightly threaded applications like older games or scripting. The desktop part also includes ECC memory support, a feature absent from the mobile chip.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H is the pick for compact or portable systems. Its 28 W TDP versus 65 W for the Core 5 213PE means far less heat generation, making it viable for thin laptops. It wins in PassMark data encryption (21428 vs. 15916, a 25.7% lead) and floating-point math (86540 vs. 68587, a 20.7% lead). The mobile chip also uses a newer 3 nm process from TSMC versus Intel's 10 nm for the desktop part, which explains its efficiency advantage. For users who need a processor that can handle encryption, physics simulations, or extended instruction sets without a large power budget, the Core Ultra 5 225H is the data-backed choice.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 213PE dominates in multi-threaded rendering and integer math. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22468 versus 14629.5 is its largest margin, and its PassMark integer math score of 92089 versus 68520 (34.4% ahead) confirms strength in general arithmetic workloads. Data compression also favors the desktop part: 298804 versus 283451, a 5.4% win. Single-core performance is another stronghold, with the 213PE winning Cinebench R15 single-core by 10.6% (319 vs. 288.5) and Cinebench R23 single-core by 61.1%.

The Core Ultra 5 225H wins in tasks that benefit from its 14 cores (versus 8) and higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. PassMark data encryption shows a 25.7% lead (21428 vs. 15916), indicating stronger cryptographic throughput. Floating-point math is 20.7% better (86540 vs. 68587), and physics simulation is 13.5% ahead (1877 vs. 1624). The mobile chip also wins PassMark multi-thread (28119 vs. 26434) and single-thread (4258 vs. 4060), despite losing the Cinebench single-core tests. Its 14 cores with 192 KB L1 per core versus 80 KB per core help in parallel tasks that scale with core count.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share the Intel manufacturer but diverge on nearly every fundamental spec. The Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry, while the Core Ultra 5 225H uses Arrow Lake-H on a 3 nm process from TSMC. The desktop part has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning it uses hyper-threading; the mobile part has 14 cores but only 14 threads, indicating a design without hyper-threading on some cores. Base clocks differ substantially: 2.70 GHz for the 213PE versus 1.70 GHz for the 225H. Boost clocks are closer but still favor the desktop chip: 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. The Core 5 213PE has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 225H has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and only 18 MB shared L3. The desktop part's larger L3 likely contributes to its Cinebench R23 single-core lead. Memory support differs: the 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the 225H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the mobile chip has higher bandwidth (102.4 GB/s vs. 76.8 GB/s). ECC memory is supported only on the Core 5 213PE.

PCIe lanes also differ: the desktop part has Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the mobile part has Gen 5 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics are different: UHD Graphics 730 for the 213PE versus Arc Graphics 130T for the 225H. The mobile chip's newer process and lower TDP (28 W vs. 65 W) point to a fundamentally different thermal design. The Core Ultra 5 225H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, while the Core 5 213PE has no series designation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H reaches 4.90 GHz.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 225H support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is only supported on the Core 5 213PE.

Q: Which chip has more cores?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225H has 14 cores, versus 8 cores on the Core 5 213PE. Both have 16 threads on the desktop part and 14 threads on the mobile part.

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core 5 213PE wins by 53.6%, scoring 22468 versus 14629.5 for the Core Ultra 5 225H.

Q: What socket does each processor use?

A: The Core 5 213PE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 225H uses Intel BGA 2049.

Q: Which chip has the higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225H has 102.4 GB/s, versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 213PE.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Core 5 213PE is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where its 22468 score beats 14629.5 by 53.6%. The single-core version of that same test shows an even bigger relative gap: 3172 versus 1969, a 61.1% lead. PassMark integer math also goes decisively to the desktop part: 92089 versus 68520, a 34.4% margin. Data compression is closer, with the 213PE ahead 298804 versus 283451 (5.4%). In Cinebench R15 single-core, the 213PE wins 319 versus 288.5, a 10.6% edge.

The Core Ultra 5 225H answers with its own clear wins. PassMark data encryption shows 21428 versus 15916, a 25.7% advantage. Floating-point math favors the mobile chip by 20.7% (86540 vs. 68587). Prime number finding is a 48.2% lead (220 vs. 114), and extended instructions are 10.7% ahead (21915 vs. 19565). Physics simulation goes to the 225H by 13.5% (1877 vs. 1624). PassMark multi-thread is 6% higher (28119 vs. 26434), and single-thread is 4.7% higher (4258 vs. 4060). In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the 225H wins 10041 versus 9436 (6%), and in R20 single-core it wins 1417 versus 1332 (6%). Random string sorting is a 4.8% win for the mobile part (33654 vs. 32027).

The overall win count is 12 for the Core Ultra 5 225H and 5 for the Core 5 213PE. However, the Core 5 213PE's wins in Cinebench R23 are outliers in magnitude, while the Core Ultra 5 225H's wins are more consistent but smaller. The average benchmark score tells the opposite story: the Core 5 213PE averages 35428 versus 31508 for the 225H, and the desktop part ranks in the 85th percentile of all CPUs versus 82nd for the mobile chip.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. Core count: 8 for the Core 5 213PE, 14 for the Core Ultra 5 225H. Threads: 16 versus 14. Base clock: 2.70 GHz versus 1.70 GHz. Boost clock: 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. TDP: 65 W versus 28 W. Socket: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2049. Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Arrow Lake-H. Process node: 10 nm from Intel versus 3 nm from TSMC.

Cache values differ across all levels: L1 is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core, L2 is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core, and L3 is 24 MB shared versus 18 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the desktop part, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the mobile part. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the Core 5 213PE. PCIe lanes are 16 versus 8, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc Graphics 130T. Market segment: Desktop versus Mobile. Release dates differ: 2026-03-08 for the 213PE versus 2025-01-12 for the 225H. The Core 5 213PE has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core Ultra 5 225H has no recorded launch MSRP.