Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture. Across the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, the Intel Core 5 213PE claims 16 wins, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V takes one. The margin of victory varies dramatically depending on the workload.

The largest single win for the Core 5 213PE comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 22468 against 9848, a delta of 128.1%. This is the standout result in the entire comparison. PassMark integer math shows a similar gap, with the Core 5 213PE at 92089 versus 38647, a 138.3% advantage. These two results indicate a fundamental performance gap in heavily threaded, compute-intensive tasks.

Cinebench R20 single-core also favors the Core 5 213PE heavily. Its score of 1332 beats the Ultra 5 226V's 900 by 48%. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 81.9% lead for the Core 5 213PE, scoring 3172 against 1744. Even in the closest single-threaded measurement, PassMark single-thread, the Core 5 213PE leads at 4060 versus 3754, an 8.2% margin.

Other multi-threaded results reinforce the pattern. Cinebench R15 multi-core gives the Core 5 213PE a 50.8% lead (2264 vs 1501). Cinebench R20 multi-core follows with a 47.9% edge (9436 vs 6381). PassMark multi-thread shows 26434 versus 17850, a 48.1% difference. PassMark physics delivers a 12.1% win for the Core 5 213PE, scoring 1624 against 1449.

Memory and data-oriented tasks also go to the Core 5 213PE. PassMark data compression shows a 75.1% advantage (298804 vs 170687). PassMark random string sorting favors it by 53.9% (32027 vs 20813). PassMark data encryption provides a 25.2% lead (15916 vs 12710). PassMark extended instructions sees a 32.9% edge (19565 vs 14724). PassMark floating-point math adds another 31.2% win for the Core 5 213PE (68587 vs 52270).

The single victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V comes in PassMark find prime numbers. Here it scores 166 against 114, a 31.3% advantage. This is an outlier result. It suggests the Ultra 5 226V has some specific strength in this particular algorithm, despite losing every other comparison.

The overall average benchmark scores reinforce the hierarchy. The Core 5 213PE posts an average of 35428, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 5 226V averages 19368, sitting in the 73rd percentile. The nearest rival data provides context. The Core 5 213PE is essentially tied with the Core i7-13700T (0.1% delta), Core i7-12700KF (0.2%), Core i5-13600T (0.3%), and Core i7-12700K (0.4%). The Ultra 5 226V matches the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS exactly (0%), sits slightly below the Core i5-1345U (-0.2%) and Core i7-10700F (-0.7%), and slightly above the Core i7-8700K (0.7%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies. The Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. It is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 5 226V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2833.

Core counts are identical at 8, but threading differs. The Core 5 213PE supports 16 threads, indicating simultaneous multi-threading. The Ultra 5 226V supports only 8 threads, one per core. This explains much of the multi-core performance gap. The Core 5 213PE can process two threads per core, effectively doubling its thread capacity in many workloads.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Core 5 213PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 226V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 8 MB of shared L3. The Core 5 213PE has three times the shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 226V has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which may help its single-threaded efficiency per clock.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The Core 5 213PE has a 2.70 GHz base clock and a 5.20 GHz boost. The Ultra 5 226V has a 2.10 GHz base and a 4.50 GHz boost. The Core 5 213PE has higher clocks at both ends. Its boost advantage is 700 MHz, which contributes to its single-threaded leads.

Power characteristics differ drastically. The Core 5 213PE has a 65 watt TDP. The Ultra 5 226V has a 17 watt TDP. This is a 48 watt difference. The Ultra 5 226V is clearly designed for power efficiency in mobile devices, while the Core 5 213PE targets desktop performance.

Memory support diverges. The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Ultra 5 226V has unknown memory support that depends on the motherboard, uses dual-channel memory, and has no ECC support. Its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the data.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 5 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 5 226V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. Integrated graphics are different as well: UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 213PE versus Arc 130V on the Ultra 5 226V.

The release dates are separated. The Ultra 5 226V launched in September 2024. The Core 5 213PE launched in March 2026. The Core 5 213PE is the newer part by roughly 18 months. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The data splits cleanly by workload type. The Core 5 213PE wins in essentially every production and compute scenario. Its 16 threads, larger L3 cache, higher clocks, and higher TDP give it a decisive edge in multi-threaded rendering, compilation, data compression, encryption, and general number crunching.

The Cinebench results are particularly telling. The R23 multi-core delta of 128.1% shows the Core 5 213PE is in a different performance class for CPU rendering. The R23 single-core delta of 81.9% is also massive, indicating the higher boost clock and architecture choices matter even in lightly threaded tasks.

Data compression and encryption favor the Core 5 213PE by 75.1% and 25.2% respectively. These are common server and workstation tasks. The extra threads and 24 MB of L3 provide a clear benefit. Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive test, also goes to the Core 5 213PE by 53.9%.

The Ultra 5 226V wins only in PassMark find prime numbers, with a 31.3% edge. This is a specific mathematical workload. The larger per-core L1 cache (192 KB vs 80 KB) may explain this result. Prime number finding can be cache-sensitive, and the Ultra 5 226V's per-core cache allocation appears better suited to this algorithm.

The power efficiency picture is not directly benchmarked, but the TDP data implies a clear trade-off. The Ultra 5 226V delivers competitive single-threaded performance at 17 watts, versus the Core 5 213PE's 65 watts. For passive cooling, fanless designs, or battery-powered operation, the Ultra 5 226V is the only viable option. The Core 5 213PE needs a more substantial cooling solution and a desktop power supply.

The socket difference is decisive for system builders. The Core 5 213PE requires an Intel Socket 1700 motherboard. The Ultra 5 226V is soldered to Intel BGA 2833 and is not a socketed desktop part. There is no upgrade path between them. They serve entirely different markets.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE. It scores 22468 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 128.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V's 9848. It also leads in Cinebench R20 multi-core (9436 vs 6381) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (2264 vs 1501).

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark find prime numbers with a score of 166 versus 114, a 31.3% advantage. This is its only win across all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both have 8 cores. The Intel Core 5 213PE supports 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V supports 8 threads. This means the Core 5 213PE can process two threads per core.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has a TDP of 65 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has a TDP of 17 watts. The Ultra 5 226V uses substantially less power.

Q: What are the cache sizes on each processor?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 213PE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V does not list ECC support. The Core 5 213PE also supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 226V's memory support depends on the motherboard.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core 5 213PE is the superior processor for performance-oriented workloads. It wins 16 of 17 comparisons, with a 128.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and a 138.3% lead in PassMark integer math. Its 16 threads, 24 MB of L3 cache, 5.20 GHz boost clock, and 65 watt TDP enable this dominance. The average benchmark score of 35428 places it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, roughly 83% above the Ultra 5 226V's average of 19368.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V is not without merit. Its 17 watt TDP makes it suitable for mobile and low-power applications. The single benchmark win in PassMark find prime numbers shows a specific algorithmic strength. Its 73rd percentile ranking is respectable. However, the performance gap in nearly every other measurement is substantial.

The choice between them is dictated by platform, not just performance. The Core 5 213PE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700 with 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support. The Ultra 5 226V is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2833 with 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and motherboard-dependent memory. A system builder choosing between them is really choosing between a desktop workstation and a mobile platform.

For users who need maximum CPU throughput, the data clearly favors the Core 5 213PE. For users who need minimal power draw, the Ultra 5 226V is the appropriate part. The Core 5 213PE also carries a launch MSRP of $221. The Ultra 5 226V has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 226V |

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

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

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

| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 24 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | Depends on motherboard |

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

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 4 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 130V |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | March 2026 | September 2024 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SA4QG | SRPMQSRPMR |