Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235A Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a dominant performance profile for the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A, which wins 16 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The single win for the Intel Core 5 213PTE comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 93,109 against 88,626, a 5.1% advantage. That is the only category where the Core 5 213PTE leads, and it is a narrow one.

The largest gaps appear in workloads that stress encryption and prime number finding. In PassMark data encryption, the Core Ultra 5 235A scores 30,136 versus 14,413, a 52.2% lead. The PassMark find prime numbers test shows a 59.9% gap, with the Core Ultra 5 235A scoring 392 against 157. Extended instructions follow at 48.9% ahead, with scores of 31,625 and 16,146.

Cinebench results are consistently one-sided. The Core Ultra 5 235A leads by 33.4% in Cinebench R15 multicore (3,289 vs 2,192) and by the same 33.4% in R15 singlecore (464 vs 309). Cinebench R20 multicore shows a 33.3% gap (13,705 vs 9,135), and R20 singlecore is 33.4% (1,934 vs 1,289). Cinebench R23 multicore is 33.3% apart (32,633 vs 21,751), while R23 singlecore is 33.4% (4,607 vs 3,070). The consistency of roughly one-third deficits across all six Cinebench runs indicates a structural performance difference rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark multithread shows a 33.3% gap (38,392 vs 25,590), and PassMark single thread is 18.4% apart (4,557 vs 3,718). Floating point math favors the Core Ultra 5 235A by 39.6% (118,778 vs 71,722). Random string sorting is 39.2% apart (49,489 vs 30,106), and data compression shows a 33.7% gap (393,800 vs 261,083). Physics is the closest PassMark category, with the Core Ultra 5 235A ahead by 9.8% (2,437 vs 2,199).

The average benchmark score reflects this overall split: the Core Ultra 5 235A records 48,201 versus 32,924 for the Core 5 213PTE, a difference of roughly 46%. The Core Ultra 5 235A sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 5 213PTE sits at the 83rd.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235A wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins only PassMark integer math, by 5.1%.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 singlecore tests all show the Core Ultra 5 235A ahead by 33.4%. PassMark single thread shows an 18.4% lead for the Core Ultra 5 235A.

Q: Is the Core 5 213PTE competitive in any compute-heavy workload?

A: Yes, in PassMark integer math it scores 93,109, which is 5.1% higher than the Core Ultra 5 235A's 88,626. That is its only recorded win.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235A averages 48,201, while the Core 5 213PTE averages 32,924. The Core Ultra 5 235A also ranks at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 83rd for the Core 5 213PTE.

Q: Which processor has the larger physical core count?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235A has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each processor according to the database?

A: The Core 5 213PTE's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-12700, with an average score of 32,942 and a delta of -0.1%. The Core Ultra 5 235A's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380, with an average score of 48,171 and a delta of 0.1%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families and use different manufacturing approaches. The Core 5 213PTE is built on Bartlett Lake, uses a 10 nm process from Intel's own fabs, and fits the Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 5 235A is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process fabricated by TSMC, and fits the Intel Socket 1851. The Core Ultra 5 235A has a documented transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm²; the Core 5 213PTE has no transistor or die size figures recorded.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning it uses simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 5 235A has 14 cores and 14 threads, with no multithreading per core. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the Core 5 213PTE and 3.40 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 235A, while boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 5.00 GHz respectively. The Core Ultra 5 235A therefore starts at a higher frequency but tops out slightly lower.

Cache organization differs as well. The Core 5 213PTE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 235A has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and the same 24 MB of shared L3. Memory support is another differentiator: the Core 5 213PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 5 235A is DDR5-only, also dual-channel, but with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 213PTE supports ECC memory; the Core Ultra 5 235A does not.

PCIe connectivity favors the Core Ultra 5 235A, which has Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes versus Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes for the Core 5 213PTE. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 5 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 235A uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. Power targets also differ, with the Core 5 213PTE rated at 45 W TDP and the Core Ultra 5 235A at 65 W TDP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 5 213PTE has a launch MSRP of $221; the Core Ultra 5 235A has a launch MSRP of $269.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235A is faster in every Cinebench test, every PassMark category except integer math, and the overall average benchmark. Its leads range from 9.8% in PassMark physics to 59.9% in PassMark find prime numbers. The Core 5 213PTE holds a single 5.1% advantage in PassMark integer math.

Buyers who need the highest recorded performance should look at the Core Ultra 5 235A. It delivers roughly one-third higher scores across Cinebench multicore and singlecore tests, more than double the data encryption score, and a 46% higher average benchmark score. It also ranks higher in the overall CPU percentile distribution, at 90 versus 83.

The Core 5 213PTE remains relevant for specific situations. Its 45 W TDP is lower than the 65 W TDP of the Core Ultra 5 235A, it supports ECC memory, and it accepts both DDR4 and DDR5 modules. It also uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform rather than the newer Socket 1851, which matters for anyone constrained to that older platform. None of those considerations change the benchmark outcome, but they explain why a slower processor might still appear in a system build.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PTE | Intel Core Ultra 5 235A |

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

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 14 |

| Base clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| 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 |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $269 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235A wins in essentially every measured compute category. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore and singlecore all favor it by about one-third. PassMark multithread, single thread, data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, physics, and random string sorting all favor it as well. The largest relative wins are in find prime numbers at 59.9% and data encryption at 52.2%, followed by extended instructions at 48.9%. These categories point to strengths in encryption workloads, vectorized or instruction-heavy code, and floating point tasks.

The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins exactly one recorded test: PassMark integer math, where it leads by 5.1%. That category reflects general integer arithmetic throughput, and the result suggests that in a narrow band of integer-heavy code the older processor can keep pace or slightly exceed the newer one. Outside that single test, the data shows no other area where the Core 5 213PTE takes the lead.

Beyond raw benchmarks, the Core 5 213PTE has structural advantages that may matter in specific builds. It supports ECC memory, which the Core Ultra 5 235A does not. It accepts DDR4 as well as DDR5, giving it wider memory compatibility. It runs at a lower 45 W TDP, and it fits the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core Ultra 5 235A counters with a higher 65 W TDP, DDR5-only support, a newer Socket 1851, more PCIe lanes, higher memory bandwidth, and a larger L1 and L2 cache per core. For pure benchmark performance, the Core Ultra 5 235A is the clear choice; for platform flexibility and ECC support, the Core 5 213PTE retains a distinct role.