Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core 5 213PTE, which wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The only tests won by the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V are passmark_find_prime_numbers (185 vs 157, a 15.1% advantage), passmark_single_thread (4018 vs 3718, a 7.5% advantage), and the duplicate passmark_singlethread result.

The most dramatic gap appears in multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 213PTE scores 21751 against 10301 for the Core Ultra 7 258V, a 111.2% advantage. That is more than double the output. Passmark integer math shows a similar extreme: 93109 vs 42889, a 117.1% delta. These are not marginal wins; the desktop part simply overwhelms the mobile chip in heavily threaded tasks.

Single-core Cinebench results also favor the Core 5 213PTE, though by smaller margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the score is 309 vs 285 (8.4% ahead). Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1289 vs 951 (35.5% ahead), and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 3070 vs 1872 (64.0% ahead). The 213PTE leads by a wide margin in the newer Cinebench versions, indicating that its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz (vs 4.80 GHz) translates directly into faster single-threaded execution in those workloads.

Other multi-threaded Passmark tests reinforce the pattern. Data compression scores 261083 vs 176686 (47.8% ahead). Floating point math scores 71722 vs 57372 (25.0% ahead). Physics scores 2199 vs 1565 (40.5% ahead). Random string sorting scores 30106 vs 21580 (39.5% ahead). Even the closer tests, data encryption (14413 vs 13534, 6.5% ahead) and extended instructions (16146 vs 14717, 9.7% ahead), still favor the Core 5 213PTE.

The Core Ultra 7 258V does hold one meaningful edge in a single-threaded Passmark test, scoring 4018 vs 3718. That 7.5% advantage in passmark_single_thread shows that the Lunar Lake architecture can execute lightly threaded code very efficiently, likely due to its newer 3 nm process and higher per-core L1 cache. However, this does not compensate for the massive multi-core deficit.

Average benchmark scores reflect the overall picture. The Core 5 213PTE has an average benchmark score of 32924, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 7 258V averages 20454, placing it in the 74th percentile. The nearest rivals for the 213PTE include the Intel Core i7-12700 (avg 32942, 0.1% ahead), AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (avg 32812, 0.3% behind), AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D (avg 33079, 0.5% ahead), and AMD Ryzen 7 8700G (avg 33089, 0.5% ahead). The Ultra 7 258V sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 5600 (avg 20468, 0.1% ahead), AMD Ryzen 5 8500G (avg 20425, 0.1% behind), AMD EPYC 9454P (avg 20422, 0.2% behind), and AMD EPYC 7713 (avg 20363, 0.4% behind).

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The Core 5 213PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, is manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process, and targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning it supports simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, is manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process, and targets the mobile segment with an Intel BGA 2833 socket. It has 8 cores but only 8 threads, so it lacks hyper-threading.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The 213PTE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The 258V provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 12 MB of shared L3. The larger L1 and L2 on the Lunar Lake part likely explain its passmark_single_thread win, while the 213PTE's doubled L3 capacity helps in larger working sets.

Memory support is another clear split. The 213PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth and full ECC memory support. The 258V supports only LPDDR5X in dual-channel, but with a much higher memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. ECC is not supported on the 258V. The 213PTE also offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the 258V offers PCIe Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes, a reflection of its mobile origin.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the 258V uses Arc 140V. The 258V also has a much lower TDP of 17 watts compared to 45 watts for the 213PTE. Base clocks are close (2.10 GHz vs 2.20 GHz), but boost clocks favor the 213PTE at 5.20 GHz vs 4.80 GHz. The 213PTE has a launch MSRP of $221. The 258V has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. For any workload that benefits from multiple threads, the Intel Core 5 213PTE is the stronger processor by a substantial margin. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is more than double that of the Core Ultra 7 258V, and its Passmark integer math score is more than double as well. Even in single-threaded Cinebench tests, the 213PTE leads, sometimes by 64%. The only consistent advantage for the 258V appears in the Passmark single-thread test and prime number finding, where its newer process and larger L1 cache produce better results.

The 213PTE also sits in a higher performance class overall. Its 83rd percentile ranking versus the 74th percentile for the 258V, combined with an average benchmark score of 32924 against 20454, confirms that the desktop part is in a different tier. The nearest rival comparisons reinforce this: the 213PTE trades blows with desktop parts like the Core i7-12700 and Ryzen 7 7800X3D, while the 258V sits alongside mid-range chips like the Ryzen 5 5600.

The 258V does have a major advantage in power consumption, with a 17 watt TDP versus 45 watts. That makes it suitable for thin-and-light mobile systems where battery life and thermals matter more than raw throughput. The 213PTE, with its 45 watt TDP, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and ECC memory support, is clearly designed for desktop workstations where power is less constrained.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 213PTE | Intel Core Ultra 7 258V |

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

| Cores | 8 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.10 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 24 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 140V |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | None recorded |

| Part number | SA4QM | SRPMNSRPMT |

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE has 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 threads. Both have 8 cores.

Q: How much faster is the Core 5 213PTE in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core 5 213PTE scores 21751 versus 10301, which is a 111.2% advantage.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 258V win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins passmark_find_prime_numbers (185 vs 157, 15.1% ahead) and passmark_single_thread (4018 vs 3718, 7.5% ahead).

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 5 213PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 7 258V supports LPDDR5X only.

Q: Which processor has ECC memory support?

A: The Core 5 213PTE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 258V does not.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core 5 213PTE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has a TDP of 17 watts.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Core 5 213PTE has an average benchmark score of 32924 (83rd percentile), while the Core Ultra 7 258V has an average of 20454 (74th percentile).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins decisively in multi-threaded rendering, physics calculations, data compression, integer math, floating point math, and random string sorting. For Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, it leads by 37.3%, 35.6%, and 111.2% respectively. Passmark physics shows a 40.5% lead, and data compression shows a 47.8% lead. Anyone running CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific simulations should prefer the 213PTE based on these figures. It also wins every single-core Cinebench test, with the largest margin being 64% in R23.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V wins only in prime number finding and the Passmark single-thread test. Its 7.5% lead in passmark_single_thread indicates a slight advantage in lightly threaded office-style tasks that rely on fast single-core execution. The prime number result (15.1% ahead) suggests an edge in certain integer-heavy sequential algorithms. For mobile users who prioritize low power consumption, the 17 watt TDP makes it the only reasonable choice between the two, as the 213PTE's 45 watt TDP is not suited for battery-powered devices.

For desktop builders, the 213PTE also offers more platform flexibility: 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, DDR4 and DDR5 support, and ECC memory. The 258V, with only 4 PCIe lanes and LPDDR5X-only memory, is locked into a mobile platform. The release dates reinforce this split: the 258V launched on 2024-09-23, while the 213PTE launched on 2026-03-08. The 213PTE is the performance pick; the 258V is the efficiency pick.