Intel Core 5 213PE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two processors into distinct roles. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285H takes 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 213PE wins 4. The margin of victory matters more than the count. The Core Ultra 9 285H dominates in multi-threaded and specialized workloads, often by double-digit percentages. The Core 5 213PE counters with impressive single-core strength in Cinebench tests and a notable win in integer math.

The largest gap appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 9 285H scores 330 against 114, a 65.5% advantage. Floating point math shows a 37.2% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285H (109190 vs 68587). Data encryption favors the Core Ultra 9 285H by 39.1% (26140 vs 15916). The Core Ultra 9 285H also leads in physics (2513 vs 1624, a 35.4% margin), extended instructions (26794 vs 19565, a 27% lead), and data compression (335859 vs 298804, an 11% gap).

Multi-core Cinebench results favor the Core Ultra 9 285H in older versions. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 3177.5 versus 2264, a 28.7% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 12201 versus 9436, a 22.7% advantage. PassMark multithread also goes to the Core Ultra 9 285H at 34171 versus 26434, a 22.6% edge. Random string sorting favors the Core Ultra 9 285H by 21.8% (40931 vs 32027). Single-thread PassMark shows a modest 8% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285H (4415 vs 4060).

The Core 5 213PE wins are concentrated in Cinebench R23. Single-core R23 shows a 49% lead (3172 vs 2129.5). Multi-core R23 gives the Core 5 213PE an 8.1% edge (22468 vs 20781.5). Integer math goes to the Core 5 213PE by 7.2% (92089 vs 85922). Cinebench R15 single-core is nearly a tie at 319 versus 313, a 1.9% win for the Core 5 213PE.

The overall average benchmark score confirms the Core Ultra 9 285H as the stronger chip: 38312 versus 35428, a difference of about 8.1%. Both sit in the 85th and 86th percentiles of all CPUs respectively. The Core Ultra 9 285H's nearest rival is the Intel Core 9 270H at a 0.1% lower score, while the Core 5 213PE's closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-13700T at 0.1% higher.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The Intel Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm Intel process node. It is a desktop part with 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake-H codename on a 3 nm TSMC process node. This is a mobile processor with 16 cores and 16 threads.

The core counts tell a clear story. The Core Ultra 9 285H has exactly twice the physical cores but the same thread count. The Core 5 213PE uses hyper-threading to reach 16 threads from 8 cores. The Core Ultra 9 285H does not use hyper-threading; its 16 threads come from 16 physical cores.

Cache layouts differ considerably. The Core 5 213PE provides 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 285H provides 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and the same 24 MB shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches on the Core Ultra 9 285H help explain its strong showing in data-heavy tests.

Clock speeds are close but favor the Core Ultra 9 285H. Base clock sits at 2.90 GHz versus 2.70 GHz. Boost clock reaches 5.40 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 285H manages this at a lower TDP of 45 watts compared to 65 watts for the Core 5 213PE, a significant efficiency advantage given the higher core count.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 9 285H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, a 33% higher memory bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes differ: the Core 5 213PE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 9 285H offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 213PE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra 9 285H uses Arc Graphics 140T, a more capable iGPU. The Core Ultra 9 285H launched in January 2025 with a launch MSRP of $651. The Core 5 213PE launched in March 2026 with a launch MSRP of $221. Both parts are actively produced and locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 49% (3172 vs 2129.5) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 1.9% (319 vs 313). However, the Core Ultra 9 285H wins PassMark single-thread by 8% (4415 vs 4060) and Cinebench R20 single-core by 22.6% (1722 vs 1332). Results depend on the benchmark.

Q: How do multi-core scores compare?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285H leads in Cinebench R15 (3177.5 vs 2264, a 28.7% edge), Cinebench R20 (12201 vs 9436, a 22.7% edge), and PassMark multithread (34171 vs 26434, a 22.6% edge). The Core 5 213PE wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 8.1% (22468 vs 20781.5).

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285H has 16 physical cores and 16 threads. The Core 5 213PE has 8 physical cores and 16 threads via hyper-threading.

Q: What are the process node differences?

A: The Core 5 213PE uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 9 285H uses TSMC's 3 nm process. This contributes to the Core Ultra 9 285H's lower 45 watt TDP despite having twice the cores.

Q: Which processor supports more memory types?

A: The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 9 285H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Core Ultra 9 285H has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each?

A: The Core 5 213PE sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 9 285H sits at the 86th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 35428 and 38312 respectively.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PE | Intel Core Ultra 9 285H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-H |

| 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) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 8 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $651 |

| Part Number | SA4QG | SRQAL |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285H is the faster processor in most workloads. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests and holds an 8.1% higher average benchmark score (38312 vs 35428). The per-core cache advantage (192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 versus 80 KB L1 and 2 MB L2) and double the physical cores give it a substantial edge in multi-threaded tasks. The 3 nm TSMC process allows this at a lower 45 watt TDP.

The Intel Core 5 213PE wins a smaller set of tests, but those wins are not trivial. The 49% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the largest margin in either direction among all head-to-head results. The 8.1% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 7.2% win in integer math show it handles certain workloads well. Its 65 watt TDP and desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700) indicate a different deployment scenario.

The Core Ultra 9 285H launched over a year earlier at a higher launch MSRP of $651 versus $221. The Core 5 213PE is a desktop processor with a lower TDP for its class, while the Core Ultra 9 285H is a mobile processor with higher performance density. The 85th versus 86th percentile ranking shows both are capable parts among all CPUs, but the Core Ultra 9 285H occupies a higher performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285H wins in compute-heavy, data-intensive, and parallel workloads. PassMark physics (2513 vs 1624), floating point math (109190 vs 68587), data encryption (26140 vs 15916), and extended instructions (26794 vs 19565) all favor it by large margins. Data compression (335859 vs 298804) and random string sorting (40931 vs 32027) also go its way. The 16 physical cores and larger per-core caches drive these results. The higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s supports memory-bound tasks. Its 5.40 GHz boost clock and 2.90 GHz base clock keep it competitive in single-threaded PassMark tests too.

The Intel Core 5 213PE wins in specific Cinebench scenarios and integer work. The Cinebench R23 single-core result (3172 vs 2129.5) stands out as a massive 49% victory, suggesting excellent per-thread execution in that benchmark. Cinebench R23 multi-core (22468 vs 20781.5) shows an 8.1% win despite having half the physical cores. Integer math (92089 vs 85922) gives it a 7.2% edge. The 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it better suited for systems with multiple high-bandwidth devices. Its DDR4 support offers flexibility for existing memory platforms.

For a desktop build where single-threaded Cinebench performance and integer processing are priorities, the Core 5 213PE delivers those strengths. For mobile systems or tasks that scale across many cores, particularly encryption, compression, physics, and floating point workloads, the Core Ultra 9 285H is the clear choice based on recorded benchmark data. The Core Ultra 9 285H's 45 watt TDP at nearly double the core count also indicates significantly better performance-per-watt in multi-threaded scenarios.