Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins all 17 recorded benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 5 213PE does not secure a single victory in any measured workload. This is not a close contest; the performance gap is consistent across every category, from single-threaded tasks to heavily parallel workloads.

The Core Ultra 5 245KF shows its largest advantages in tasks that reward raw compute throughput. In the PassMark find prime numbers test, it scores 416 versus 114 for the Core 5 213PE, a delta of -72.6% from the perspective of the slower chip. This indicates a massive lead in integer-heavy, loop-based computation. Similarly, the data encryption test shows the Ultra 5 at 33,381 points versus 15,916 points, a -52.3% difference, demonstrating a strong advantage in cryptographic and data-transformation workloads.

The smallest gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the Ultra 5 scores 98,854 versus 92,089, a -6.8% delta. This suggests that for basic integer arithmetic, the architectural differences matter less, and the Core 5 213PE is relatively competitive. The single-threaded tests also show a moderate gap: 4,715 versus 4,060 in PassMark single thread, a -13.9% delta. This is a notable difference but far smaller than the multi-threaded gaps.

For multi-threaded performance, the Ultra 5 consistently leads by roughly 38 to 39 percent. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the scores are 36,647 versus 22,468, a -38.7% delta. The same pattern holds across Cinebench R15, R20, and PassMark multithread. The Core 5 213PE, with its 8 cores and 16 threads, simply cannot match the 14-core, 14-thread configuration of the Ultra 5 in parallel workloads.

The use-case split is therefore clear. The Core Ultra 5 245KF is the superior choice for every measured scenario: content creation, data compression, encryption, physics simulation, and general multi-threaded productivity. The Core 5 213PE offers no advantage in any recorded benchmark, though its smaller gap in integer math and single-thread tasks means it is less severely outclassed there than in heavily parallel work.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their underlying design. The Core 5 213PE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, using a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2, and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has a 243 mm² die size and 17,800 million transistors; the Core 5 213PE does not have recorded transistor or die size data in the database.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning it uses simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads, indicating it does not use SMT and instead relies on more physical cores. Cache sizes also differ: the Core 5 213PE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF has 192 KB L1 per core and 3 MB L2 per core. Both share 24 MB of L3 cache.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF supports only DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, but the recorded memory bandwidth is different: 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 213PE and 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 5. The Core 5 213PE supports ECC memory; the Core Ultra 5 245KF does not.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 5 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 245KF provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 213PE (UHD Graphics 730) but are listed as N/A for the Core Ultra 5 245KF, meaning that model lacks integrated graphics. The Core 5 213PE has a locked multiplier, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF has an unlocked multiplier.

The sockets are incompatible: the Core 5 213PE uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Core Ultra 5 245KF uses Intel Socket 1851. The process node difference (10 nm versus 3 nm) and foundry difference (Intel versus TSMC) are significant architectural shifts that explain much of the performance gap, particularly in power efficiency and density.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores, while the Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores. However, the Core 5 213PE has 16 threads because it supports simultaneous multithreading, whereas the Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 threads with no SMT.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 5 has a higher recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 213PE.

Q: Is ECC memory supported on either processor?

A: The Core 5 213PE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 245KF does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 213PE includes UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A in the database.

Q: What is the boost clock for each processor?

A: Both processors have a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The base clocks differ: the Core 5 213PE runs at 2.70 GHz, and the Core Ultra 5 245KF runs at 4.20 GHz.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245KF has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 5 213PE has a locked multiplier, so it does not support multiplier-based overclocking.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear differences across nearly every field. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has more cores (14 versus 8) and a higher base clock (4.20 GHz versus 2.70 GHz), while boost clocks are identical at 5.20 GHz. The TDP differs substantially: 125 watts for the Ultra 5 versus 65 watts for the Core 5 213PE.

The process node is a major differentiator: 3 nm for the Ultra 5, fabricated by TSMC, versus 10 nm for the Core 5 213PE, fabricated by Intel. The Ultra 5 also has recorded transistor count (17,800 million) and die size (243 mm²), while the Core 5 213PE has no such data.

Cache hierarchies differ: L1 is 192 KB per core for the Ultra 5 versus 80 KB per core for the Core 5 213PE, and L2 is 3 MB per core versus 2 MB per core. L3 is identical at 24 MB shared.

Memory bandwidth is higher on the Ultra 5 (102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s). The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 and ECC memory, while the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5 and no ECC. PCIe lanes differ: 20 Gen 5 lanes for the Ultra 5 versus 16 Gen 5 lanes for the Core 5 213PE.

Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 213PE (UHD Graphics 730) but absent on the Ultra 5 (N/A). The multiplier is unlocked on the Ultra 5 and locked on the Core 5 213PE. Sockets are different: Socket 1700 for the Core 5 213PE and Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5. The release dates also differ, with the Core 5 213PE released in 2026-03-08 and the Ultra 5 in 2024-10-23.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent pattern of dominance by the Core Ultra 5 245KF. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 5 scores 3,693 versus 2,264 for the Core 5 213PE, a -38.7% delta. The single-core R15 test shows 521 versus 319, a -38.8% delta. These gaps are nearly identical across all Cinebench versions: R20 multi-core shows 15,391 versus 9,436 (-38.7%), R20 single-core shows 2,172 versus 1,332 (-38.7%), R23 multi-core shows 36,647 versus 22,468 (-38.7%), and R23 single-core shows 5,173 versus 3,172 (-38.7%). The consistent -38.7% delta across all six Cinebench tests indicates a uniform performance advantage that scales with the architecture, not a workload-specific quirk.

The PassMark suite reveals a wider spread of deltas. The largest gap is in find prime numbers: 416 versus 114, a -72.6% delta. This is the single biggest loss for the Core 5 213PE and suggests the Ultra 5's architecture is dramatically better at tight integer loops. Data encryption shows 33,381 versus 15,916 (-52.3%), and extended instructions show 37,912 versus 19,565 (-48.4%). Floating point math shows 131,546 versus 68,587 (-47.9%), and physics shows 2,998 versus 1,624 (-45.8%). Random string sorting shows 55,206 versus 32,027 (-42%). Data compression shows 460,123 versus 298,804 (-35.1%). PassMark multithread shows 43,110 versus 26,434 (-38.7%), matching the Cinebench pattern.

The smallest gaps are in integer math and single-thread tests. PassMark integer math shows 98,854 versus 92,089, a -6.8% delta. PassMark single thread and singlethread both show 4,715 versus 4,060, a -13.9% delta. These smaller gaps indicate that the Core 5 213PE is relatively less disadvantaged in basic arithmetic and single-threaded workloads, though it still loses both tests.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this disparity: the Core Ultra 5 245KF has an average benchmark score of 55,093, while the Core 5 213PE has 35,428. The Ultra 5 sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 213PE sits at the 85th. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 213PE include the Intel Core i7-13700T (0.1% delta) and Intel Core i7-12700KF (0.2% delta), showing it is closely matched with those parts. The Ultra 5's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (0.6% delta) and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (1.9% delta), placing it in a higher performance tier.

Benchmark results indicate that the Core Ultra 5 245KF delivers a decisive performance advantage in every measured category, with the strongest leads in prime number computation and encryption, and the narrowest lead in integer math. The data confirms a clear hierarchy: the Ultra 5 is the higher-performing part across the board.