Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 268V Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 213PTE compare to the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Core 5 213PTE records an average benchmark score of 32,924, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 7 268V averages 20,897, which lands in the 74th percentile. The Core 5 213PTE holds a substantial lead of roughly 12,000 points in the aggregate.

Q: Which processor wins the majority of direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Core 5 213PTE wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Core Ultra 7 268V wins only 3 tests: passmark_find_prime_numbers, passmark_single_thread, and its duplicate passmark_singlethread.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two processors?

A: The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Core 5 213PTE scores 21,751 versus 10,653 for the Core Ultra 7 268V, a delta of 104.2%. PassMark integer math shows the second-largest gap at 118.2%, though the absolute score difference there is smaller.

Q: Are there any tests where the Core Ultra 7 268V outperforms the Core 5 213PTE?

A: Yes. The Core Ultra 7 268V leads in PassMark single-thread tests with 4,051 points versus 3,718 for the Core 5 213PTE, an 8.2% advantage. It also wins the prime number search test with 192 points versus 157, a delta of -18.2% relative to the Core 5 213PTE.

Q: How do the two chips compare in terms of thread count and clock speeds?

A: Both have 8 cores, but the Core 5 213PTE supports 16 threads while the Core Ultra 7 268V supports 8 threads. The Core 5 213PTE has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost of 5.20 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 268V has a base of 2.20 GHz and a boost of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor carries the newer manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 7 268V uses a 3 nm process fabricated by TSMC. The Core 5 213PTE uses a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 268V also relies on a different socket, Intel BGA 2833, versus the Core 5 213PTE's Intel Socket 1700.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two distinct roles. The Intel Core 5 213PTE dominates in heavily threaded workloads: it leads by 104.2% in Cinebench R23 multicore, 118.2% in PassMark integer math, and 35.6% in Cinebench R15 multicore. Its 16 threads give it a clear structural advantage in rendering, compilation, and any parallel compute task. The 83rd percentile placement and an average score of 32,924 place it near the Intel Core i7-12700 and AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with deltas of -0.1% and -0.5% respectively.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V is the choice for single-thread responsiveness in a mobile context. It wins PassMark single-thread with 4,051 points, an 8.2% margin over the Core 5 213PTE. Its 74th percentile and average score of 20,897 align it with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4655GE and Intel Core i5-12600T, both within 0.1% of its average. The 17 W TDP and 3 nm process signal a low-power design for thin-and-light systems.

The verdict is straightforward: the Core 5 213PTE for desktop performance across multi-core applications, the Core Ultra 7 268V for single-thread efficiency in mobile hardware. The data does not support using the Core Ultra 7 268V for heavy multi-core work, where it trails by over 100% in the most demanding render test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 5 213PTE establishes its dominance early in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 2,192 against 1,616, a 35.6% lead. The R20 multicore test shows 9,135 versus 6,887, a 32.6% gap. The R20 single-core test also shows a 32.6% delta, with 1,289 points versus 972. The largest Cinebench gap comes in R23 multicore: 21,751 versus 10,653, a 104.2% difference. Even in R23 single-core, the Core 5 213PTE leads with 3,070 versus 1,921, a 59.8% margin.

PassMark results follow a similar pattern. Data compression favors the Core 5 213PTE at 261,083 versus 181,443, a 43.9% delta. Floating-point math shows 71,722 versus 57,628, a 24.5% lead. Integer math produces the widest PassMark margin: 93,109 versus 42,669, a 118.2% advantage. Multithread testing yields 25,590 versus 19,297, a 32.6% delta. Physics scores 2,199 versus 1,617, a 36% lead. Random string sorting finishes at 30,106 versus 22,416, a 34.3% gap. Data encryption is closer: 14,413 versus 13,779, a 4.6% edge. Extended instructions also favor the Core 5 213PTE, 16,146 versus 15,323, a 5.4% margin.

The Core Ultra 7 268V takes three wins. PassMark single-thread shows 4,051 versus 3,718, an 8.2% advantage (the duplicate singlethread test records the same result). Prime number search gives the Core Ultra 7 268V 192 points versus 157, a delta of -18.2%. These wins are narrow in absolute terms and confined to light, single-threaded tasks.

The aggregated win count of 14 versus 3 reflects the Core 5 213PTE's broad superiority across the benchmark suite. The average benchmark score difference, 32,924 versus 20,897, reinforces that the Core 5 213PTE is the stronger overall performer in raw compute output.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores and 16 threads; the Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are close, 2.10 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, but boost clocks diverge: 5.20 GHz for the Core 5 213PTE, 5.00 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 268V.

Thermal design power shows a major split. The Core 5 213PTE carries a 45 W TDP. The Core Ultra 7 268V carries a 17 W TDP, less than half the desktop part's figure.

Sockets differ entirely. The Core 5 213PTE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The Core Ultra 7 268V uses Intel BGA 2833, a mobile package. This aligns with their market segments: Desktop for the Core 5 213PTE, Mobile for the Core Ultra 7 268V.

Memory support also differs. The Core 5 213PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 268V's memory support is listed as unknown and dependent on the motherboard, with no bandwidth figure recorded. The Core 5 213PTE supports ECC memory; the Core Ultra 7 268V does not.

PCIe lanes show a significant gap. The Core 5 213PTE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 7 268V provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra 7 268V uses Arc 140V.

Release dates are distinct: the Core 5 213PTE entered the database with a 2026-03-08 release date, while the Core Ultra 7 268V carries a 2024-09-23 release date. The Core 5 213PTE has a launch MSRP of $221; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 7 268V.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is substantial. The Core 5 213PTE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, fabricated on a 10 nm process by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 268V uses the Lunar Lake codename from the Core Ultra Series 2, fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC. This node difference explains the Core Ultra 7 268V's lower TDP despite similar core counts.

Cache layouts diverge significantly. The Core 5 213PTE has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 268V has 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The Core 5 213PTE's larger L3 pool likely contributes to its multi-core advantages, while the Core Ultra 7 268V's larger per-core L1 and L2 may aid its single-thread wins.

Threading architecture differs structurally. The Core 5 213PTE supports 16 threads, implying simultaneous multithreading on its 8 cores. The Core Ultra 7 268V supports 8 threads, matching its core count with no multithreading. This explains the 104.2% Cinebench R23 multicore gap: the Core 5 213PTE can process twice the thread count.

The Core Ultra 7 268V's integrated graphics, Arc 140V, represents a more advanced GPU block than the Core 5 213PTE's UHD Graphics 730. The mobile part also uses the BGA 2833 socket, which pairs with the 3 nm TSMC process for power efficiency. The Core 5 213PTE's 45 W TDP and Socket 1700 target desktop boards with more substantial cooling.

Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither offers overclocking via the clock multiplier. The Core 5 213PTE's ECC support and DDR4/DDR5 compatibility give it a flexibility advantage in workstation-style builds, while the Core Ultra 7 268V's motherboard-dependent memory profile suggests a more integrated, less upgradeable mobile design.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins in every multi-core category. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore all favor it by margins from 32.6% to 104.2%. PassMark multithread, physics, integer math, floating-point math, data compression, random string sorting, data encryption, and extended instructions all go to the Core 5 213PTE. Its 16 threads and 24 MB L3 cache make it the clear pick for video rendering, software compilation, scientific computing, and any workload that scales across cores. The 83rd percentile placement and average score of 32,924 reinforce its standing as a high-end desktop processor.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V wins in two narrow categories. PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests show 4,051 points, an 8.2% lead, indicating faster per-core execution for lightly threaded applications. The prime number search test also favors it, 192 versus 157. These results suggest strengths in interactive responsiveness, legacy single-threaded software, and workloads that cannot use multiple threads. The 17 W TDP and 3 nm TSMC process make it suitable for battery-conscious mobile devices where sustained multi-core performance is less critical.

The use-case split is clear. The Core 5 213PTE for desktop workstations and any task requiring maximum throughput across many threads. The Core Ultra 7 268V for mobile systems prioritizing single-thread speed and power efficiency. The data does not show the Core Ultra 7 268V as competitive in multi-core scenarios, where it trails by over 100% in the most demanding test. Each processor serves the segment its specifications target: the desktop part with high TDP and 16 lanes of Gen 5 PCIe, the mobile part with minimal TDP and 4 lanes.