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

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between these two desktop processors is lopsided but telling. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 5 213PE takes only 2. That alone suggests a clear overall hierarchy, but the two wins for the Core 5 213PE are not meaningless outliers. They point to specific workload characteristics where the older architecture holds an edge.

The Core 5 213PE wins in PassMark data compression and PassMark integer math. The data compression score of 298804 beats the Ultra 5 245T's 283812, a margin of 5.3%. Integer math shows 92089 versus 88676, a 3.8% advantage. These are classic throughput-oriented tasks that respond well to high sustained clocks and a traditional core layout with simultaneous multithreading.

The Core Ultra 5 245T dominates everywhere else. Its wins cover the entire Cinebench suite (R15, R20, R23, both single-core and multi-core), plus PassMark encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. The margins range from a modest 7% in single-thread PassMark up to a massive 64.8% in prime number finding.

For content creation, the Ultra 5 245T is clearly the stronger pick. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 26208 versus 22468, which is a 14.3% lead. Single-core Cinebench R23 also favors the Ultra at 3699 versus 3172, another 14.2% gap. The only area where the Core 5 213PE offers a practical advantage is compression-style work, where its 5.3% lead could translate to faster archive handling or certain database workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations with fundamentally different internal layouts. The Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 5 245T belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake-S, on Intel Socket 1851, and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning it uses simultaneous multithreading to reach double the thread count. The Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores but only 14 threads, which indicates a hybrid core arrangement without hyperthreading on the efficiency cores or a design choice to run one thread per core across the board. The result is that the Ultra 5 has more physical cores but fewer total threads than its rival.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 5 213PE carries 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 245T has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and the same 24 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations on the Ultra part likely feed its strong floating point and encryption results.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 245T supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 5's memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5. The Ultra 5 also provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, compared to 16 on the Core 5. Both support ECC memory.

Integrated graphics are not equal. The Core 5 213PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 245T includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Both are desktop parts with active production status. The Core 5 213PE released on March 8, 2026, while the Ultra 5 245T released on January 6, 2025. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are remarkably consistent. Across R15, R20, and R23, the Core Ultra 5 245T leads by 14.2% to 14.3% in both single-core and multi-core runs. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2641 versus 2264, R20 multi-core shows 11007 versus 9436, and R23 multi-core shows 26208 versus 22468. Single-core runs show the same pattern: R15 at 372 versus 319, R20 at 1553 versus 1332, and R23 at 3699 versus 3172. This uniformity suggests a stable architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark results paint a more varied picture. The biggest single margin is in prime number finding, where the Ultra 5 245T scores 324 versus just 114, a 64.8% lead. Floating point math also heavily favors the Ultra at 108499 versus 68587, a 36.8% gap. Data encryption shows 23656 versus 15916, a 32.7% advantage. Physics follows at 2278 versus 1624, a 28.7% lead. Extended instructions favor the Ultra by 11.4% with 22071 versus 19565. Random string sorting gives the Ultra a 8.3% edge at 34931 versus 32027.

The Core 5 213PE fights back in two specific PassMark tests. Data compression at 298804 beats the Ultra's 283812 by 5.3%. Integer math at 92089 beats 88676 by 3.8%. Both are respectable wins, but they are narrow compared to the Ultra's margins in most other tests.

PassMark multithread and single-thread scores round out the picture. Multithread favors the Ultra at 30833 versus 26434, a 14.3% gap. Single-thread favors the Ultra at 4367 versus 4060, a 7% lead. The single-thread margin is smaller than the Cinebench single-core margin, which shows that the Core 5 213PE's high 5.20 GHz boost clock does help in lightly threaded PassMark workloads.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ on nearly every core specification. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads; the Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores and 14 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, favoring the Core 5. Boost clocks are 5.20 GHz versus 5.10 GHz, again favoring the Core 5 by a small margin. Both have a 65 W TDP.

Process node and foundry split the pair. The Core 5 uses Intel's 10 nm process, while the Ultra 5 uses TSMC's 3 nm process. The Ultra 5 has a disclosed transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 5 has no transistor or die size data recorded.

Cache configurations differ in L1 and L2. The Core 5 offers 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, while the Ultra 5 offers 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. Shared L3 is identical at 24 MB.

Platform support diverges completely. The Core 5 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851. Memory support on the Core 5 includes DDR4 and DDR5; the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. PCIe lanes from the CPU are 16 Gen 5 on the Core 5 and 20 Gen 5 on the Ultra 5. The integrated GPU differs: UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Launch MSRP is $221 for the Core 5 and $270 for the Ultra 5.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores, while the Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores. The Core 5 has more threads, 16 versus 14, due to simultaneous multithreading.

Q: How much faster is the Core Ultra 5 245T in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 245T scores 26208 versus 22468 for the Core 5 213PE, a 14.3% lead. The R20 and R15 multi-core tests show the same 14.3% margin.

Q: Does the Core 5 213PE win any benchmark?

A: Yes. It wins PassMark data compression with 298804 versus 283812, a 5.3% margin, and PassMark integer math with 92089 versus 88676, a 3.8% margin.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245T has 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Core 5 213PE has 76.8 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 only, while the Core 5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 5 213PE has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, slightly higher than the Ultra 5 245T's 5.10 GHz. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 and 2.20 GHz for the Ultra 5.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245T includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the Core 5 213PE includes UHD Graphics 730. Both are integrated solutions, but the Ultra 5 uses a newer GPU architecture.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T as the stronger processor for the vast majority of workloads. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, including every Cinebench test with a consistent 14.2% to 14.3% margin. Its leads in prime number finding (64.8%), floating point math (36.8%), and data encryption (32.7%) are substantial enough to matter for scientific computing, financial analysis, and security-related tasks. The larger L1 and L2 caches, higher memory bandwidth, and 3 nm process node all align with these results.

The Intel Core 5 213PE is not without merit. Its wins in data compression and integer math show that the older architecture still handles certain throughput tasks competitively. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and the 16 threads give it a niche in compression workloads. For users on Socket 1700 platforms with DDR4 memory already installed, the Core 5 213PE offers a path that avoids a platform change.

For a new build, the data favors the Core Ultra 5 245T. Its average benchmark score of 38194 places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 213PE sits at 35428 and the 85th percentile. The Ultra 5 also matches or beats the Core 5 in nearly every measured category, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 250, with the Ultra 5 trailing by only 0.1%. The Core 5 213PE's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13700T, with a delta of 0.1% in favor of the Core 5.

The choice depends on workload mix. Compression-heavy tasks and integer math favor the Core 5 213PE. Everything else, from rendering to encryption to physics simulation, favors the Core Ultra 5 245T. The Ultra 5 is the more capable all-round processor, and the benchmark data supports that conclusion without qualification.