Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the two processors, with the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H taking 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 213PE wins 4. The overall average benchmark scores sit close, with the Core 5 213PE at 35428 versus the Core Ultra 5 336H at 34485, a difference of roughly 2.7% in favor of the desktop part. This narrow aggregate margin, however, masks the very different ways each chip wins.

In the Cinebench suite, the Core Ultra 5 336H is consistently ahead. It leads by 6.4% in Cinebench R15 multicore (2418 versus 2264) and by 6.5% in R15 singlecore (341 versus 319). The pattern repeats in R20, with the mobile chip ahead by 6.4% in multicore (10076 versus 9436) and by 6.3% in singlecore (1422 versus 1332). The R23 results follow the same trend: the Ultra 5 336H scores 23991 versus 22468 in multicore and 3387 versus 3172 in singlecore, both margins at 6.3%. These are narrow but consistent advantages across every rendering workload in the database.

The Core Ultra 5 336H also dominates several Passmark subtests. The largest single gap appears in the find prime numbers test, where it scores 299 versus just 114 for the Core 5 213PE, a 61.9% advantage. It also wins decisively in data encryption, posting 21291 versus 15916, a 25.2% edge, and in extended instructions, where it scores 24542 versus 19565, a 20.3% lead. Floating point math goes to the Ultra 5 336H by 16.8% (82415 versus 68587), and the physics subtest shows a 39.4% advantage (2682 versus 1624). Even in the multithread test, the Ultra 5 336H wins by 7.4% (28545 versus 26434), and in random string sorting it leads by 6.9% (34402 versus 32027).

The Core 5 213PE, however, has its own pockets of strength. Its biggest win is in integer math, where it scores 92089 versus 62070, a 48.4% margin that is the largest of any head-to-head result. It also wins data compression, posting 298804 versus 280340, a 6.6% advantage. The two single-thread Passmark entries, which are identical scores recorded under different labels, go to the Core 5 213PE by a slim 1.2% margin (4060 versus 4013). These four wins show that the desktop chip retains a notable edge in specific integer-heavy and compression tasks, even as the mobile part takes the majority of the workload categories.

The aggregate picture is one of near parity in overall average score, but the distribution of wins matters. The Core 5 213PE sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 336H sits at the 84th percentile. The nearest rival for the Core 5 213PE is the Intel Core i7-13700T, with an average score of 35403 and a delta of 0.1%, followed by the Core i7-12700KF at 35365 (0.2% delta), the Core i5-13600T at 35305 (0.3% delta), and the Core i7-12700K at 35287 (0.4% delta). For the Core Ultra 5 336H, the closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-13700HX at 34554, a -0.2% delta, then the Core i5-13450HX at 34333 (0.4% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X at 34260 (0.7% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 at 34222 (0.8% delta). These rival placements confirm that both chips operate in the same performance tier, just with different workload profiles.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 336H is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering and creative workloads. Its consistent wins across all three Cinebench versions, both singlecore and multicore, indicate that it handles ray tracing, 3D modeling, and video encoding tasks with a measurable, if modest, performance advantage. The physics subtest, where it leads by 39.4%, further points to strength in simulation and game physics calculations. The 25.2% lead in data encryption and the 20.3% lead in extended instructions suggest it is also better suited for security-related tasks, cryptographic operations, and workloads that rely on newer instruction set extensions. The floating point math advantage of 16.8% reinforces its suitability for scientific computing and signal processing.

The Core 5 213PE, by contrast, wins where raw integer throughput dominates. Its 48.4% margin in integer math is a standout result, indicating that database operations, financial modeling, and general office productivity tasks that rely on integer arithmetic will see a substantial benefit. The 6.6% edge in data compression shows that file archiving and storage-related workloads favor the desktop chip. The narrow 1.2% lead in single-thread Passmark is small but consistent across the two recorded entries, suggesting a slight advantage in lightly threaded legacy applications.

For users running mixed workloads, the database points to the Core Ultra 5 336H as the more versatile performer, as it wins 13 of the 17 tests. The Core 5 213PE is more specialized, with its wins concentrated in two categories, integer math and data compression, plus a marginal single-thread edge. The choice between the two should hinge on whether the workload favors the mobile chip's balanced multi-threaded and floating point strengths or the desktop chip's exceptional integer performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families and target different market segments. The Core 5 213PE is a desktop part codenamed Bartlett Lake, built on a 10 nm process node, and fits the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core Ultra 5 336H is a mobile part from the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node, and uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket. The process node difference is substantial, with the mobile chip using a more advanced manufacturing process, which likely contributes to its lower thermal design power.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Ultra 5 336H has twice the core count but no thread advantage, suggesting the desktop part uses hyperthreading to reach 16 threads, while the mobile part relies on a higher core count with one thread per core. The base clock of the Core 5 213PE is 2.70 GHz, which is higher than the 1.90 GHz of the Ultra 5 336H, but the boost clock reverses the picture: the desktop chip reaches 5.20 GHz versus 4.60 GHz for the mobile chip.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 5 213PE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. So the mobile chip has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, but the desktop chip has a larger total L3 pool.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and it has ECC memory support. The Core Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and no ECC support. The mobile chip's higher bandwidth likely benefits the floating point and encryption workloads where it excels.

PCIe lanes differ, with the Core 5 213PE offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 336H offers Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the desktop part uses UHD Graphics 730, while the mobile part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The Core 5 213PE has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Ultra 5 336H has no recorded launch MSRP. The Core 5 213PE has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Ultra 5 336H is rated at 25 watts, a notable difference for cooling and power consumption.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: In the Cinebench tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H leads in singlecore across R15 (341 versus 319), R20 (1422 versus 1332), and R23 (3387 versus 3172), each by about 6.3% to 6.5%. However, in the Passmark single-thread test, the Intel Core 5 213PE wins by a slim 1.2% (4060 versus 4013).

Q: Why does the Core Ultra 5 336H win so many more benchmark tests?

A: The recorded data shows the Ultra 5 336H wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, including all six Cinebench entries and several Passmark subtests. Its advantages are largest in find prime numbers (61.9%), physics (39.4%), data encryption (25.2%), and extended instructions (20.3%).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two chips?

A: The largest margin in either direction is in Passmark integer math, where the Intel Core 5 213PE scores 92089 versus 62070 for the Ultra 5 336H, a 48.4% advantage for the desktop part. The second largest gap is in find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 336H leads by 61.9%.

Q: Do the two processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The desktop chip uses a lower core count with hyperthreading, while the mobile chip has double the physical cores but no hyperthreading.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 213PE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H does not. The desktop chip also supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the mobile chip only supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: How do the two chips compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE has an average benchmark score of 35428, which places it at the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has an average score of 34485, placing it at the 84th percentile. The difference is about 2.7% in favor of the desktop part.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 336H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Bartlett Lake | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| 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) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | None recorded |

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct usage profiles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is the better choice for rendering, scientific workloads, encryption, and physics-heavy tasks. Its consistent Cinebench wins, along with large margins in floating point math, extended instructions, and prime number finding, make it the stronger all-rounder for creative and computational users. The 25-watt TDP also makes it suitable for thin and light mobile systems, where the Core 5 213PE's 65-watt desktop requirement would be impractical.

The Intel Core 5 213PE is the pick for workloads that hinge on integer math and data compression. Its 48.4% integer math advantage is the largest margin in the entire comparison, and its 6.6% data compression lead shows clear utility in archiving, database, and file management tasks. The 16 PCIe lanes and ECC memory support also give it an edge in workstation-style desktop builds that require those features. The launch MSRP of $221 provides a reference point for that desktop segment.

Users who need a single chip for mixed duties should favor the Core Ultra 5 336H, given its 13 wins versus 4. Those who prioritize integer-heavy productivity or require ECC support should select the Core 5 213PE. The near-identical overall average scores, 35428 versus 34485, confirm that neither chip is universally superior; the correct choice depends entirely on the workload mix.