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

The Intel Core 5 213PE and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represent two distinct points in Intel's desktop lineup, separated by architecture, process technology, and performance tier. The benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, though with one notable exception in single-core Cinebench R23 where the Core 5 213PE takes a decisive win. This analysis breaks down the recorded measurements, architectural differences, and the specific workloads where each processor holds an advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 9 285K dominates the majority of the recorded benchmarks, winning 16 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The largest margin appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 9 285K scores 541 against 114 for the Core 5 213PE, a delta of 78.9%. Data encryption shows a similarly large gap, with the Core Ultra 9 285K at 57745 versus 15916, a 72.4% difference. These two tests highlight the substantial compute advantage of the higher-core-count processor in integer-heavy and cryptographic workloads.

Multi-core rendering benchmarks also favor the Core Ultra 9 285K by wide margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 9 285K scores 6494 against 2264 for the Core 5 213PE, a 65.1% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 60.7% gap, with scores of 24003 and 9436 respectively. Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows the relative gap slightly to 47.2%, with the Core Ultra 9 285K at 42522 and the Core 5 213PE at 22468. The PassMark multithread test mirrors the R20 result at a 60.7% difference, showing 67260 versus 26434.

The single-core picture is more nuanced. PassMark single thread gives the Core Ultra 9 285K a 20.2% advantage, scoring 5087 against 4060. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a much smaller gap, with the Core Ultra 9 285K at 359 and the Core 5 213PE at 319, an 11.1% difference. Cinebench R20 single-core, however, shows a 60.7% gap in favor of the Core Ultra 9 285K, with scores of 3388 and 1332. The exception to this trend is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 5 213PE wins with a score of 3172 against 2377 for the Core Ultra 9 285K, a 33.4% advantage. This isolated result stands out against the otherwise consistent pattern of Core Ultra 9 285K superiority.

The average benchmark score places the Core Ultra 9 285K at 83807, compared to 35428 for the Core 5 213PE. The Core Ultra 9 285K sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 213PE sits at the 85th percentile. In the nearest rival comparison, the Core Ultra 9 285K is 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and 0.9% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX. The Core 5 213PE, by contrast, is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13700T and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12700K.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. The Core 5 213PE uses a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 9 285K uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Core Ultra 9 285K carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 5 213PE has no recorded transistor or die size data.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The Core 5 213PE provides 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285K provides 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core 5 213PE therefore offers simultaneous multithreading, while the Core Ultra 9 285K does not, instead relying on its higher physical core count.

Cache hierarchy favors the Core Ultra 9 285K at every level. The Core 5 213PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 285K has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3.

The Core Ultra 9 285K belongs to the Arrow Lake architecture with the codename Arrow Lake-S, while the Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename. The Core Ultra 9 285K uses the Intel Socket 1851, and the Core 5 213PE uses the Intel Socket 1700. Both support ECC memory. The Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 9 285K supports DDR5 only, also dual-channel, with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 5 213PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 9 285K provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics differ as well, with the Core 5 213PE using UHD Graphics 730 and the Core Ultra 9 285K using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285K has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Core 5 213PE has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Q: Does the Core 5 213PE support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes, the Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 285K supports DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes from the CPU?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285K provides 20 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, compared to 16 Gen 5 lanes for the Core 5 213PE.

Q: How do the two processors compare in PassMark data compression?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285K scores 790052 against 298804 for the Core 5 213PE, a 62.2% difference.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 9 285K multiplier unlocked?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 9 285K has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 213PE does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285K has an average benchmark score of 83807, compared to 35428 for the Core 5 213PE.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra 9 285K wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and holds a 96th percentile rank against all CPUs in the database, compared to the 85th percentile for the Core 5 213PE. The average benchmark score of 83807 for the Core Ultra 9 285K is more than double the 35428 of the Core 5 213PE.

The Core Ultra 9 285K delivers the higher performance in nearly every measured category, with multi-core workloads showing particularly large gaps. The 24-core configuration, 3 nm process, 36 MB of L3 cache, and higher memory bandwidth all contribute to this result. The Core 5 213PE, however, takes a single benchmark win in Cinebench R23 single-core with a 33.4% advantage, an outcome that stands out from the rest of the data.

The launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 9 285K is $589, and the launch MSRP for the Core 5 213PE is $221. The Core Ultra 9 285K also carries a 125 TDP rating versus 65 for the Core 5 213PE, indicating a higher power envelope. The performance data shows that the Core Ultra 9 285K justifies its higher tier with dominant multi-core results, while the Core 5 213PE remains competitive in specific single-core tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly all recorded specifications. The Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285K has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 213PE and 3.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 285K. Boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 5.70 GHz respectively. TDP is 65 for the Core 5 213PE and 125 for the Core Ultra 9 285K.

Sockets differ, with the Core 5 213PE on Intel Socket 1700 and the Core Ultra 9 285K on Intel Socket 1851. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 5 213PE and 3 nm for the Core Ultra 9 285K, with the latter fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 9 285K records 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5 213PE has no transistor or die size data.

Cache configurations differ at every level. The Core 5 213PE has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 285K has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. Memory support differs, with the Core 5 213PE accepting DDR4 and DDR5 at 76.8 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 9 285K accepts DDR5 only at 102.4 GB/s. PCIe lanes from the CPU number 16 for the Core 5 213PE and 20 for the Core Ultra 9 285K, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 5 213PE and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for the Core Ultra 9 285K. The Core 5 213PE has a locked multiplier, while the Core Ultra 9 285K is unlocked.

Where Each One Wins

Multi-threaded rendering and compute workloads belong to the Core Ultra 9 285K. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show the Core Ultra 9 285K ahead by 47.2% to 65.1%. PassMark multithread confirms the pattern at a 60.7% gap. Data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, physics, and random string sorting all favor the Core Ultra 9 285K, with deltas ranging from 46.6% to 78.9%.

Single-thread performance is split. PassMark single thread and Cinebench R15 single-core favor the Core Ultra 9 285K by 20.2% and 11.1% respectively. Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 60.7% gap in favor of the Core Ultra 9 285K. The Core 5 213PE wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 33.4%, a result that indicates the Core 5 213PE can deliver competitive single-core performance in at least one rendering workload.

The data indicates that the Core Ultra 9 285K is the choice for heavily parallel workloads where core count and cache size matter. The Core 5 213PE shows a narrower set of advantages, with its single Cinebench R23 single-core win and a lower 65 TDP that suggests a more modest power profile.