Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core 5 221TE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor delivers the higher multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE dominates in every multi-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 21751 versus 11305 for the Core 5 221TE, a 92.4% advantage. The PassMark multi-thread test shows a similar gap at 25590 versus 13301.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap between the two?

A: The Core 5 213PTE leads by 92.4% in Cinebench R23 single-core (3070 versus 1596) and by 114.4% in PassMark single-thread (3718 versus 1734). The boost clock difference, 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz, contributes to this edge.

Q: Which chip has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 221TE has 10 cores, while the Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores. Both parts support 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the 213PTE wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on both parts.

Q: What is the difference in their launch MSRP?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Intel Core 5 221TE has a launch MSRP of $232. The higher-priced chip is the slower one in all recorded benchmarks.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Core 5 213PTE has an average benchmark score of 32924, placing it at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs. The Core 5 221TE averages 17860, at the 71st percentile. The 213PTE's average is about 84% higher.

Architecture Differences

Both processors come from the Bartlett Lake generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process node and manufactured by Intel. They share the Intel Socket 1700 platform, the integrated UHD Graphics 730, and a 45 W TDP. The core configurations differ significantly. The Core 5 213PTE uses 8 cores with 2 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Core 5 221TE uses 10 cores with 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. Both share a 24 MB L3 cache and 80 KB of L1 cache per core.

The 213PTE runs at a 2.10 GHz base clock and a 5.20 GHz boost clock. The 221TE starts lower at 1.80 GHz base and boosts to 5.00 GHz. These clock differences are substantial, with the 213PTE holding a 0.30 GHz base advantage and a 0.20 GHz boost advantage. The higher clocks explain why the 8-core part outperforms the 10-core part across all workloads.

The die size is documented only for the 221TE at 215 mm². The 213PTE's die size is not recorded in the database. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning neither supports unlocked overclocking. The 213PTE carries part number SA4QM, while the 221TE uses SRVQS.

Release dates differ by about 14 months. The 221TE appeared first on 2025-01-12, and the 213PTE followed on 2026-03-08. Both are currently marked as Active in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core 5 213PTE wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. No single test favors the 221TE. The margins range from 60.8% to 166.1%, showing a consistent and often massive performance advantage for the 213PTE.

The Cinebench suite shows nearly uniform results. In Cinebench R15, the 213PTE scores 2192 multi-core versus 1139, a 92.4% lead, and 309 single-core versus 160, a 93.1% lead. Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern: 9135 versus 4748 multi-core and 1289 versus 670 single-core, both at a 92.4% delta. Cinebench R23 also delivers a 92.4% gap in both multi-core (21751 versus 11305) and single-core (3070 versus 1596). The consistency across Cinebench versions suggests the performance ratio is stable across rendering workloads of varying intensity.

PassMark tests reveal where the 213PTE's advantage is largest. The prime number test shows a 166.1% lead (157 versus 59), the largest margin in any benchmark. Floating-point math follows at 126.5% (71722 versus 31661), physics at 125.1% (2199 versus 977), and integer math at 120.1% (93109 versus 42303). Single-thread performance in PassMark shows a 114.4% gap (3718 versus 1734).

The smallest margins still favor the 213PTE decisively. Data encryption shows a 60.8% lead (14413 versus 8963), extended instructions a 67.2% lead (16146 versus 9655), data compression a 66.6% lead (261083 versus 156682), and random string sorting a 77.8% lead (30106 versus 16929). These smaller gaps in encryption and compression tasks suggest the 221TE's additional cores provide some benefit in memory-latency-sensitive workloads, but not enough to overcome the 213PTE's clock advantage.

The average benchmark scores place these chips in different competitive tiers. The 213PTE at 32924 sits near the Intel Core i7-12700 (32942, 0.1% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (32812, 0.3% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D (33079, 0.5% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G (33089, 0.5% behind). The 221TE at 17860 sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891, 0.2% behind), the Intel Core 5 120U (17898, 0.2% behind), the Intel Core 7 350 (17779, 0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17994, 0.7% behind). The 213PTE competes with modern mid-range desktop chips, while the 221TE aligns with older or lower-tier processors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PTE | Intel Core 5 221TE |

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

| Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Base clock | 2.10 GHz | 1.80 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| Die size | Not recorded | 215 mm² |

| Release date | 2026-03-08T17:00:00.000Z | 2025-01-12T17:00:00.000Z |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $232 |

| Part number | SA4QM | SRVQS |

Both processors share the same cores count for threads (16), TDP (45 W), socket (Intel Socket 1700), process node (10 nm), L1 cache (80 KB per core), L3 cache (24 MB shared), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (dual-channel), memory bandwidth (76.8 GB/s), ECC support (true), PCIe configuration (Gen 5, 16 lanes CPU only), integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), market segment (Desktop), production status (Active), and unlocked multiplier status (false).

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a complete victory for the Intel Core 5 213PTE. It wins every benchmark with margins between 60.8% and 166.1%. The 221TE's additional two cores do not compensate for its lower base clock, lower boost clock, and smaller per-core L2 cache. The 213PTE's average benchmark score of 32924 places it at the 83rd percentile, while the 221TE's 17860 places it at the 71st percentile. The 213PTE also carries a lower launch MSRP of $221 versus $232 for the 221TE.

The 213PTE releases later in the product cycle, which aligns with its higher performance and lower price. Anyone selecting between these two based strictly on the benchmark data should choose the 213PTE. The 221TE offers no recorded advantage in any workload category.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins in every category measured. In rendering workloads, the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show a 92.4% advantage. In single-core performance, Cinebench R15 shows a 93.1% lead, while Cinebench R20 and R23 show 92.4%. PassMark single-thread tests show a 114.4% lead.

The 213PTE's largest wins come in arithmetic and physics workloads. Prime number finding shows a 166.1% lead, floating-point math shows 126.5%, and physics shows 125.1%. Integer math follows at 120.1%. These results indicate the 213PTE's higher clocks provide outsized benefits in compute-heavy tasks.

The 221TE has no benchmark wins. Its closest margins, still losses, appear in data encryption (60.8% behind), data compression (66.6% behind), and extended instructions (67.2% behind). These tasks may benefit from the 221TE's higher core count, reducing the gap, but the 213PTE still holds a commanding lead.

For workloads involving encryption, compression, or extended instruction sets, the 213PTE remains the stronger choice, but the margin is smaller than in pure arithmetic tasks. For rendering, physics simulation, prime number calculation, and single-threaded applications, the 213PTE is dramatically faster. The database shows no scenario where the 221TE is preferable.