Intel Core 5 213PTE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive verdict: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core 5 213PTE taking a single victory. The average benchmark score tells the same story, with the Core Ultra 9 285HX at 76155 versus 32924 for the Core 5 213PTE, a gap that places the two processors in different performance tiers entirely.

The largest margins appear in multi-threaded and data-heavy workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 9 285HX scores 5656.5 against 2192, a 61.2% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 20236 versus 9135, a 54.9% advantage. Passmark data compression favors the Core Ultra 9 285HX at 631885 against 261083, a 58.7% gap, while data encryption shows 48567 versus 14413, the widest margin on the board at 70.3%. Extended instructions follow at 67.1% (49148 versus 16146), and prime number finding at 65.9% (460 versus 157).

The Core Ultra 9 285HX also dominates floating-point math, scoring 194998 versus 71722 (63.2% ahead), and random string sorting at 77196 versus 30106 (61% ahead). Integer math shows a 40% lead (155076 versus 93109), and the Passmark multithread test lands at 56902 versus 25590, a 55% advantage. Physics results indicate 3476 versus 2199, a 36.7% lead.

Single-thread results are closer but still favor the Core Ultra 9 285HX. Passmark single-thread shows 4618 versus 3718, a 19.5% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 323.5 versus 309, a narrow 4.5% margin. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2856 versus 1289, a 54.9% advantage for the Core Ultra 9.

The single win for the Core 5 213PTE comes in Cinebench R23 single-core. There, the Core 5 213PTE scores 3070 against 2187.5, a 40.3% lead. This is the only test where the smaller processor outruns its larger rival, and it indicates a meaningful single-core strength in that specific workload.

The Core Ultra 9 285HX holds a 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Core 5 213PTE sits at the 83rd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 9 include the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX (0.1% ahead), AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (0.4% ahead), and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (0.5% ahead). The Core 5 213PTE sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and AMD Ryzen 7 8700G.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design lineages. The Intel Core 5 213PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename with an Intel 10 nm process node. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX codename with a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 9 285HX belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and carries the Arrow Lake architecture, while the Core 5 213PTE has no listed architecture beyond its codename.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 5 213PTE provides 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX provides 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 9 has no hyperthreading, matching threads to cores, while the Core 5 doubles its thread count. The Core Ultra 9 285HX reports 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5 213PTE has no transistor or die size data recorded.

Cache hierarchies differ in both capacity and organization. The Core 5 213PTE carries 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 9 285HX carries 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches and greater shared pool align with the 285HX's higher core count and performance envelope.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 5 213PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but bandwidth differs: 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 versus 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 9. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes also differ, with the Core 5 providing Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes and the Core Ultra 9 providing Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ by generation. The Core 5 213PTE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core Ultra 9 also comes with an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 does not, allowing overclocking on the former but not the latter.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows the Core Ultra 9 285HX as the clear choice for multi-threaded throughput, data compression, encryption, extended instruction workloads, and floating-point math. Its leads in Passmark data compression (58.7%), encryption (70.3%), and extended instructions (67.1%) make it suitable for database workloads, compression tools, and scientific computing. The multithread score of 56902 against 25590 confirms a substantial advantage in parallel processing.

The Core Ultra 9 285HX also wins in single-thread Passmark tests by 19.5%, so it retains an edge in lightly threaded tasks despite its lower Cinebench R23 single-core result. The physics score of 3476 versus 2199 indicates better performance in simulation and physics-heavy applications.

The Core 5 213PTE wins only in Cinebench R23 single-core, where its 3070 score beats 2187.5 by 40.3%. This result suggests the Core 5 has a strong single-core capability in that specific rendering benchmark, potentially benefiting applications that rely on single-threaded Cinebench performance. However, this win does not extend to other single-thread tests, where the Core Ultra 9 leads.

For the Core 5 213PTE, the data shows a competitive position against its nearest rivals. It sits within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-12700, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H, and 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D and Ryzen 7 8700G. The Core Ultra 9 285HX, meanwhile, trades within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and sits 0.1% behind the Ryzen 9 8945HX.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

• Cores: 8 (Core 5) versus 24 (Core Ultra 9)
• Threads: 16 (Core 5) versus 24 (Core Ultra 9)
• Base clock: 2.10 GHz (Core 5) versus 2.80 GHz (Core Ultra 9)
• Boost clock: 5.20 GHz (Core 5) versus 5.50 GHz (Core Ultra 9)
• TDP: 45 W (Core 5) versus 55 W (Core Ultra 9)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 5) versus Intel BGA 2114 (Core Ultra 9)
• Process node: 10 nm (Core 5) versus 3 nm (Core Ultra 9)
• Foundry: Intel (Core 5) versus TSMC (Core Ultra 9)
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core (Core 5) versus 192 KB per core (Core Ultra 9)
• L2 cache: 2 MB per core (Core 5) versus 3 MB per core (Core Ultra 9)
• L3 cache: 24 MB shared (Core 5) versus 36 MB shared (Core Ultra 9)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 5) versus DDR5 (Core Ultra 9)
• Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s (Core 5) versus 102.4 GB/s (Core Ultra 9)
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 lanes (Core 5) versus Gen 5, 20 lanes (Core Ultra 9)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 (Core 5) versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU (Core Ultra 9)
• Market segment: Desktop (Core 5) versus Mobile (Core Ultra 9)
• Multiplier unlocked: No (Core 5) versus Yes (Core Ultra 9)
• Release date: 2026-03-08 (Core 5) versus 2025-01-12 (Core Ultra 9)
• Launch MSRP: $221 (Core 5) versus null (Core Ultra 9)
• Part number: SA4QM (Core 5) versus SRVFJ (Core Ultra 9)
• Transistors: null (Core 5) versus 17,800 million (Core Ultra 9)
• Die size: null (Core 5) versus 243 mm² (Core Ultra 9)

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX has 24 cores, while the Intel Core 5 213PTE has 8 cores.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX averages 76155, while the Intel Core 5 213PTE averages 32924. The Core Ultra 9 sits at the 95th percentile, the Core 5 at the 83rd.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 213PTE win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 3070 versus 2187.5, a 40.3% lead.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 213PTE supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX supports DDR5 only.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Core 5 213PTE does not.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE uses a 10 nm node from Intel, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX uses a 3 nm node from TSMC.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX as the dominant performer. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests, holds a 95th percentile ranking, and delivers a 76155 average benchmark score. Its leads in multi-core, encryption, compression, and floating-point workloads are substantial, ranging from 36.7% to 70.3%. The 24-core configuration, 36 MB shared L3, 3 nm process node, and unlocked multiplier align with its high-end positioning.

The Intel Core 5 213PTE offers a single bright spot in Cinebench R23 single-core, where its 40.3% lead indicates a niche strength. Its 83rd percentile and 32924 average score place it in a mid-range tier, competitive with the Intel Core i7-12700 (0.1% behind) and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H (0.3% ahead). Its desktop socket, DDR4 support, and 45 W TDP suggest a different use case focused on compatibility and efficiency rather than raw throughput.

The data supports choosing the Core Ultra 9 285HX for any workload that benefits from high core counts, large caches, and parallel execution. The Core 5 213PTE suits scenarios where the single Cinebench R23 single-core result matters, or where the desktop platform, DDR4 compatibility, and lower TDP are priorities. The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Core Ultra 9 285HX is the faster processor in nearly every measured category.