Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive result: the Intel Core 5 213PE wins 16 of 17 recorded head-to-head tests against the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V. The only exception is the Passmark find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 7 258V leads by 38.4 percent. Beyond that single outlier, the Core 5 213PE dominates across both synthetic rendering and real-world workload simulations.

The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Core 5 213PE scores 22468 against 10301 for the Ultra 7 258V, a 118.1 percent advantage. That result more than doubles the mobile chip's output. Passmark integer math follows a similar pattern: 92089 versus 42889, a 114.7 percent gap. These two tests indicate that heavily threaded integer workloads are not merely faster on the Core 5 213PE, they complete in roughly half the time.

Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 41.8 percent lead (2264 versus 1596.5), while Cinebench R20 multicore lands at 40 percent (9436 versus 6739). Passmark multithread matches that 40 percent delta (26434 versus 18887). The consistency across three Cinebench versions and Passmark's multithread test confirms the multicore advantage is not an artifact of a single benchmark version.

Single-core results are closer but still favor the Core 5 213PE. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows a 69.4 percent lead (3172 versus 1872), and Cinebench R20 singlecore shows 40.1 percent (1332 versus 951). Passmark single thread narrows to just 1 percent (4060 versus 4018), and Passmark singlethread repeats the identical 1 percent margin. The Cinebench single-core tests exaggerate the gap relative to Passmark, but the direction is consistent.

Memory-sensitive tests also favor the Core 5 213PE. Passmark data compression scores 298804 versus 176686, a 69.1 percent lead. Random string sorting shows 48.4 percent (32027 versus 21580). Extended instructions show 32.9 percent (19565 versus 14717). Data encryption shows 17.6 percent (15916 versus 13534). Floating point math shows 19.5 percent (68587 versus 57372). Even the closest non-trivial win, Passmark physics at 3.8 percent (1624 versus 1565), goes to the Core 5 213PE.

The Ultra 7 258V's single win in prime number finding (185 versus 114) is worth examining. That test measures integer throughput in a specific algorithmic pattern. The Core 5 213PE wins the broader integer math test by 114.7 percent, so the prime number result likely reflects a specialized instruction path or scheduling advantage rather than general integer capability.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel product lines with fundamentally different design goals. The Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 7 258V belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Lunar Lake codename and architecture, and is fabricated on a 3 nm node at TSMC. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 3 nm, explains much of the efficiency gap between them.

Core counts match at 8 cores each, but thread counts diverge. The Core 5 213PE supports 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 258V supports 8 threads. That doubling of thread count gives the Core 5 213PE its structural advantage in multithreaded benchmarks. The base clocks also differ: 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 213PE versus 2.20 GHz for the Ultra 7 258V. Boost clocks reach 5.20 GHz on the Core 5 213PE and 4.80 GHz on the Ultra 7 258V.

Cache configurations are substantially different. The Core 5 213PE has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 258V has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 258V carries more private cache per core, but the Core 5 213PE has double the shared L3 capacity. For workloads that benefit from a large shared pool, the Core 5 213PE has the advantage.

Memory support reflects their different market positions. The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel access and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 258V has nearly 78 percent more memory bandwidth despite its lower overall benchmark scores. ECC memory is supported on the Core 5 213PE but not on the Ultra 7 258V.

PCIe lanes differ sharply. The Core 5 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Ultra 7 258V provides Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes. That makes the Core 5 213PE suitable for discrete GPUs and expansion cards, while the Ultra 7 258V is constrained to a mobile platform.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Core 5 213PE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Ultra 7 258V uses Arc 140V. The database does not provide graphics benchmarks for either, so no performance comparison is possible from this data.

Thermal design power tells the efficiency story. The Core 5 213PE is rated at 65 W, while the Ultra 7 258V is rated at 17 W. The Ultra 7 258V consumes roughly a quarter of the power budget, which aligns with its mobile market segment and smaller process node.

The Core 5 213PE uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop market segment. The Ultra 7 258V uses Intel BGA 2833 and targets mobile. Release dates differ as well: the Core 5 213PE launched on 2026-03-08, while the Ultra 7 258V launched on 2024-09-23.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 213PE wins in every multithreaded rendering test and most single-threaded tests. Its 16 threads against 8 give it a structural edge in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore, and in Passmark multithread. The 118.1 percent lead in Cinebench R23 multicore is the strongest argument for the Core 5 213PE in CPU-bound content creation. Integer math, floating point math, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting all favor the Core 5 213PE by margins between 17.6 percent and 114.7 percent. The desktop chip is the clear choice for rendering, compiling, data processing, and any workload that scales with thread count.

The Ultra 7 258V wins only the Passmark find prime numbers test. That result, 185 versus 114, indicates a specific algorithmic strength. The mobile chip also carries advantages that do not appear in the benchmark scores. Its 17 W TDP versus 65 W makes it the appropriate choice for battery-powered systems. Its 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 76.8 GB/s helps memory-bound tasks despite the lower raw CPU scores. The Arc 140V integrated graphics likely outperform UHD Graphics 730, though the database records no graphics benchmark to confirm this.

The Core 5 213PE sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Ultra 7 258V sits at the 74th percentile. The average benchmark scores reflect that gap: 35428 for the Core 5 213PE versus 20454 for the Ultra 7 258V. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 213PE are the Intel Core i7-13700T (0.1 percent slower), Intel Core i7-12700KF (0.2 percent slower), Intel Core i5-13600T (0.3 percent slower), and Intel Core i7-12700K (0.4 percent slower). The nearest rivals for the Ultra 7 258V are the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 (0.1 percent faster), AMD Ryzen 5 8500G (0.1 percent slower), AMD EPYC 9454P (0.2 percent slower), and AMD EPYC 7713 (0.4 percent slower). These rival comparisons place the Core 5 213PE in the upper tier of desktop processors, while the Ultra 7 258V sits near mid-range desktop chips despite being a mobile part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE wins all multi-core tests. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 22468 versus 10301, a 118.1 percent lead. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 9436 versus 6739, a 40 percent lead. Passmark multithread shows 26434 versus 18887, also a 40 percent lead.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins Passmark find prime numbers with a score of 185 versus 114, a 38.4 percent advantage. That is its only win across the 17 recorded head-to-head tests.

Q: How close are the single-thread results?

A: Passmark single thread shows 4060 for the Core 5 213PE versus 4018 for the Ultra 7 258V, a 1 percent margin. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows a larger gap: 3172 versus 1872, a 69.4 percent lead for the Core 5 213PE.

Q: Why does the Ultra 7 258V have higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Ultra 7 258V supports LPDDR5X memory with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The Core 5 213PE has a 65 W TDP, while the Ultra 7 258V has a 17 W TDP. The Ultra 7 258V uses a 3 nm TSMC process, while the Core 5 213PE uses a 10 nm Intel process.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Core 5 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 258V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core Ultra 7 258V |

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

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.80 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) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 140V |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | Not available |

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core 5 213PE is the stronger processor for compute-heavy workloads. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests, holds the 85th percentile versus the 74th percentile, and delivers an average benchmark score of 35428 against 20454. The 16-thread configuration, 24 MB shared L3 cache, and higher clock speeds produce decisive advantages in rendering, integer math, compression, and encryption. The nearest rivals to the Core 5 213PE are all within 0.4 percent of its average score, placing it in a tight cluster of high-end desktop parts.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is not without merit, but its strengths lie outside the recorded CPU benchmarks. The 17 W TDP makes it suitable for mobile systems where power draw matters more than raw throughput. The 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth and Arc 140V integrated graphics offer platform capabilities that the Core 5 213PE does not match. Its nearest rival cluster includes the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 and Ryzen 5 8500G, which places it in mid-range desktop territory despite its mobile designation.

The choice depends on the workload and platform. For desktop users running multithreaded applications, the Core 5 213PE is the clear pick from the benchmark evidence. For mobile users prioritizing power efficiency and integrated graphics, the Ultra 7 258V is the only option of the two, given its BGA 2833 socket and 17 W TDP. The prime number finding advantage of the Ultra 7 258V is a narrow specialty, not a general performance trend. The Core 5 213PE remains the benchmark leader in nearly every recorded metric.