Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a clear split between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 213PTE takes 3 wins. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The Core Ultra 5 225 dominates in most multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 2609 against 2192 for the Core 5 213PTE, a 16% advantage. The same 16% delta appears in Cinebench R15 singlecore, where the Ultra 5 posts 368 versus 309. Cinebench R23 follows the same pattern: the Ultra 5 scores 25891 multicore and 3655 singlecore, both 16% ahead of the Core 5's 21751 and 3070 respectively.

The PassMark suite reinforces this trend. The Ultra 5 leads in data compression by 13.8%, scoring 302811 against 261083. Data encryption shows a larger gap at 35.3%, with 22285 versus 14413. Extended instructions favor the Ultra 5 by 40.6%, and prime number finding shows the biggest single delta at 56.1%, with 358 versus 157. Floating point math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests all go to the Ultra 5 with deltas ranging from 6.1% to 22.1%.

The Core 5 213PTE counters in three specific areas. Cinebench R20 multicore shows a 44.6% advantage for the Core 5, scoring 9135 against 6317. Cinebench R20 singlecore follows at 44.7%, with 1289 versus 891. PassMark integer math also favors the Core 5 by 42.5%, scoring 93109 against 65345.

The average benchmark scores reflect this overall split. The Core Ultra 5 225 averages 36938, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 213PTE averages 32924, good for the 83rd percentile. The Core Ultra 5's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F at a 0% delta, the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at -0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at -0.4%. The Core 5 213PTE sits near the Intel Core i7-12700 at -0.1%, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H at 0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D at -0.5%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The Core 5 213PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with base and boost clocks of 2.10 GHz and 5.20 GHz respectively. The Core Ultra 5 225 uses the Arrow Lake-S codename on a 3 nm process node from TSMC. It has 10 cores but only 10 threads, with a 3.30 GHz base clock and 4.90 GHz boost clock. The Ultra 5's transistor count reaches 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5's transistor count and die size are not recorded.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches on the Ultra 5 likely contribute to its single-thread performance advantage, while the Core 5's larger L3 pool helps in certain shared-resource workloads.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth. The Ultra 5 is limited to DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a higher 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the Core 5 but not on the Ultra 5.

PCIe lanes differ as well. The Core 5 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 5 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 uses UHD Graphics 730, and the Ultra 5 features Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 has a 45 W TDP, and the Ultra 5 has a 65 W TDP. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning no overclocking via multiplier adjustment. The Core 5 launched on 2026-03-08 with a launch MSRP of $221. The Ultra 5 launched on 2025-01-06 with a launch MSRP of $246.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has 10 cores, while the Intel Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores. The Core 5 has 16 threads, while the Ultra 5 has 10 threads.

Q: Why does the Core 5 win Cinebench R20 but lose Cinebench R23?

A: The recorded data shows the Core 5 scores 44.6% higher in Cinebench R20 multicore and 44.7% higher in singlecore, but the Ultra 5 wins Cinebench R23 multicore and singlecore by 16%. These different benchmark versions appear to stress the processors differently, with R20 favoring the Core 5's architecture and R23 favoring the Ultra 5.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225 has 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, compared to 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 213PTE. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 only, while the Core 5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 scores 358 against 157 for the Core 5, a 56.1% advantage for the Ultra 5.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 5 213PTE supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 225 does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225 averages 36938, which is higher than the Core 5 213PTE's 32924. The Ultra 5 sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 sits in the 83rd percentile.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Core Ultra 5 225 as the stronger all-around performer. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, holds a 12.2% higher average benchmark score, and occupies a higher percentile rank. The Ultra 5's wins span both single-thread and multi-thread workloads, covering Cinebench R15, Cinebench R23, and the majority of PassMark tests. Its architecture, built on a 3 nm TSMC process with larger per-core caches, delivers consistent advantages across diverse workloads.

The Core 5 213PTE, however, is not without merit. Its wins in Cinebench R20 and PassMark integer math are substantial, with deltas above 42%. These results indicate that certain workloads, particularly those that align with the R20 test methodology or integer-heavy operations, respond well to the Core 5's 16 threads and 24 MB of L3 cache. The Core 5 also supports ECC memory and both DDR4 and DDR5, offering flexibility that the Ultra 5 lacks.

For users prioritizing raw performance across a broad range of applications, the data favors the Core Ultra 5 225. For those with specific workloads that match its strengths, or requiring ECC support, the Core 5 213PTE remains a viable choice. The socket difference means platform choice is a deciding factor: Socket 1700 for the Core 5 versus Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Core 5 213PTE uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 5 225 uses 10 cores and 10 threads. Base clocks differ at 2.10 GHz for the Core 5 and 3.30 GHz for the Ultra 5, while boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 4.90 GHz respectively.

The process nodes are from different foundries: 10 nm at Intel for the Core 5, 3 nm at TSMC for the Ultra 5. The Ultra 5's die measures 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors; the Core 5's die size and transistor count are not recorded.

Cache layouts diverge: L1 is 80 KB per core on the Core 5 versus 192 KB per core on the Ultra 5. L2 is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 is 24 MB shared versus 20 MB shared.

Memory support differs: the Core 5 accepts DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 5 accepts DDR5 only with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. ECC is available on the Core 5 but not the Ultra 5.

PCIe lanes are 16 on the Core 5 and 20 on the Ultra 5, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU on the Ultra 5.

TDP is 45 W for the Core 5 and 65 W for the Ultra 5. Sockets are Intel Socket 1700 and Intel Socket 1851 respectively. Both have locked multipliers. The Core 5 launched March 2026 with a launch MSRP of $221; the Ultra 5 launched January 2025 with a launch MSRP of $246.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 225 wins in the majority of measured scenarios. It leads in Cinebench R15 multicore and singlecore, Cinebench R23 multicore and singlecore, PassMark data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. This broad coverage suggests the Ultra 5 is the better choice for general productivity, content creation, and mixed workloads. Its higher memory bandwidth and 3 nm process likely contribute to these consistent wins.

The Core 5 213PTE wins in Cinebench R20 multicore and singlecore, plus PassMark integer math. The R20 results, with deltas above 44%, indicate that workloads similar to that benchmark's methodology may benefit from the Core 5's 16-thread configuration and larger shared L3 cache. The integer math win at 42.5% suggests that integer-heavy computation, such as certain database or compilation tasks, could favor the Core 5. ECC memory support adds appeal for stability-sensitive environments.

The percentile data reinforces this split. The Ultra 5's 85th percentile and average score of 36938 place it ahead of the Core 5's 83rd percentile and 32924 average. The nearest rival comparisons show the Ultra 5 trading blows with AMD Ryzen 5 5600F, Ryzen 5 5500X3D, and Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, while the Core 5 sits near the Core i7-12700 and Ryzen 7 7800X3D. These positions indicate the Ultra 5 competes in a slightly higher performance tier.