Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-14400F tops out at 4.70 GHz. That gives the Core 5 a clear frequency advantage in burst workloads.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores, but both processors present 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 213PTE uses 8 cores with 16 threads, indicating a different core arrangement with the same thread count.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. The Intel Core 5 213PTE lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the i5-14400F has no bandwidth figure recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE includes UHD Graphics 730. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, with the database listing "N/A" for that field.

Q: How large is the L3 cache on each chip?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has 20 MB shared. The Core 5 also uses 2 MB of L2 per core versus 1.25 MB per core on the i5-14400F.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE records an average benchmark score of 32924, placing it 83rd percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core i5-14400F averages 32279, also in the 83rd percentile. The 645-point gap is under 2 percent of the total average.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits clearly along workload type. The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-14400F wins 4. Each processor dominates a distinct category of work.

The Core 5 213PTE takes every Cinebench test, every single-thread PassMark test, and the heavy math and physics workloads. Its largest wins come in prime number finding (82.6% ahead), physics simulation (44.4% ahead), and floating point math (17% ahead). The processor also leads in integer math by 14.2%. These results point to a chip that excels in computational density and per-clock execution.

The Intel Core i5-14400F wins in data compression (17.3% ahead), data encryption (15% ahead), extended instructions (19% ahead), and random string sorting (7.9% ahead). These are workloads that often benefit from additional physical cores and the i5-14400F's 10-core configuration. The i5-14400F also carries a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, which may contribute to sustained throughput in these tasks.

The pattern is consistent: the Core 5 213PTE wins in latency-sensitive and math-heavy workloads, while the i5-14400F wins in memory-throughput-heavy and encryption workloads. Users whose work involves physics, number crunching, or floating point operations should favor the Core 5. Users handling compression, encryption, or SIMD-heavy code should favor the i5-14400F.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 10 nm process and use the Intel Socket 1700 platform. Both are produced by Intel's foundry. The architectural split comes from their codenames and core configurations.

The Intel Core 5 213PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, with a generation label of "Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)". Its die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database. The Intel Core i5-14400F uses Raptor Lake-R silicon, from the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, with a die size of 215 mm². The Core 5's smaller core count of 8 versus 10 suggests a different physical layout, though no die size is available for direct comparison.

Cache architecture differs significantly. The Core 5 213PTE allocates 2 MB of L2 per core, double the 1.25 MB per core on the i5-14400F. Its L3 cache is 24 MB shared, 4 MB larger than the i5-14400F's 20 MB. Both share the same L1 cache size of 80 KB per core.

The presence of integrated graphics is a major architectural distinction. The Core 5 213PTE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the i5-14400F has no iGPU at all, requiring a discrete graphics card for display output.

Both processors support ECC memory, dual-channel memory, and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, limiting manual overclocking on both parts. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. Core count: 8 cores on the Core 5 213PTE versus 10 cores on the i5-14400F. Thread count is identical at 16.

Base clock: the Core 5 213PTE runs at 2.10 GHz, the i5-14400F at 2.50 GHz. Boost clock: the Core 5 213PTE reaches 5.20 GHz, the i5-14400F reaches 4.70 GHz. Power: the Core 5 213PTE has a 45 W TDP, the i5-14400F has a 65 W TDP.

Memory bandwidth: the Core 5 213PTE lists 76.8 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the i5-14400F. Cache: 2 MB per core L2 on the Core 5 versus 1.25 MB per core on the i5-14400F; 24 MB shared L3 versus 20 MB shared.

Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 213PTE, none on the i5-14400F. Release date: the Core 5 213PTE launched in March 2026, while the i5-14400F launched in January 2024. Launch MSRP: the Core 5 213PTE carries a launch MSRP of $221, the i5-14400F a launch MSRP of $196.

Die size: 215 mm² for the i5-14400F, no figure recorded for the Core 5 213PTE. Part numbers: SA4QM for the Core 5 213PTE, SRN3RSRN47 for the i5-14400F.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows consistent, if narrow, wins for the Intel Core 5 213PTE across all six tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core 5 scores 2192 against 2181, a 0.5% margin. Single-core R15 shows 309 versus 307, a 0.7% edge. R20 multicore: 9135 versus 9090, 0.5%. R20 single-core: 1289 versus 1283, 0.5%. R23 multicore: 21751 versus 21645, 0.5%. R23 single-core: 3070 versus 3055, 0.5%. These margins are small but uniform, indicating a slight per-core efficiency advantage for the Core 5.

PassMark multithread scores nearly identical results: 25590 for the Core 5 versus 25470 for the i5-14400F, a 0.5% win. PassMark single-thread also shows a narrow Core 5 lead: 3718 versus 3701, 0.5%.

The decisive wins come in specialized workloads. PassMark find prime numbers shows the Core 5 at 157 versus 86, an 82.6% advantage, the largest margin in the entire comparison. PassMark physics: 2199 versus 1523, a 44.4% lead. PassMark floating point math: 71722 versus 61319, a 17% lead. PassMark integer math: 93109 versus 81524, a 14.2% lead.

The i5-14400F wins its four tests by larger margins than the Core 5's Cinebench wins. PassMark extended instructions: 19937 versus 16146, a 19% lead for the i5-14400F. PassMark data compression: 315521 versus 261083, a 17.3% lead. PassMark data encryption: 16949 versus 14413, a 15% lead. PassMark random string sorting: 32680 versus 30106, a 7.9% lead.

The average benchmark score in the database places the Core 5 213PTE at 32924, approximately 0.5% above its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-12700, which scores 32942. The i5-14400F averages 32279, about 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U at 32233. Both processors sit in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 213PTE is the stronger all-around processor in this comparison. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench benchmark and every PassMark single-thread and math test. Its 45 W TDP is lower than the i5-14400F's 65 W, and it includes integrated graphics, a feature entirely absent from the i5-14400F. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and larger L2 and L3 caches support its dominance in latency-sensitive workloads.

The Intel Core i5-14400F is the better choice for specific throughput workloads. Its 10-core configuration drives wins in data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting, with margins between 7.9% and 19%. It also has a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz and a launch MSRP of $196, which is lower than the Core 5's $221 launch MSRP.

For users running physics simulations, prime number calculations, floating point or integer math, the Core 5 213PTE is the clear pick. The 44.4% advantage in physics and 82.6% advantage in prime finding are decisive. For users whose work involves compression, encryption, or SIMD instruction sets, the i5-14400F delivers meaningfully better results.

Both chips share the same socket, memory support, ECC capability, PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and thread count. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The choice comes down to workload profile and the tradeoff between the Core 5's mathematical strength, lower power draw, and integrated graphics versus the i5-14400F's extra cores, higher base clock, and throughput-oriented wins. The database record favors the Core 5 for general use, with the i5-14400F earning its place in specialized data-processing environments.