Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX Comparison
Intel Core 5 221E
Core Ultra 9 285HX
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The recorded data presents a lopsided contest. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX claims 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmark victories, while the Intel Core 5 221E manages only 2 wins. The margin of victory in most tests is substantial, indicating a clear performance hierarchy between these two processors.
The most dramatic divergence appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Core Ultra 9 285HX scores 5656.5 against the Core 5 221E's 2613, a 53.8% advantage. This pattern continues in Cinebench R20 multi-core with scores of 20236 versus 10891, a 46.2% gap. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows a somewhat narrower but still decisive margin: 36429.5 versus 25933, a 28.8% difference. These multi-core results consistently favor the Ultra 9, reflecting its higher core and thread configuration.
The single-core picture is more complex. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Core 5 221E wins with 368 points versus 323.5 for the Ultra 9, a 13.8% edge. The Core 5 221E repeats this in Cinebench R23 single-core with 3661 points against 2187.5, an extraordinary 67.4% advantage. However, the Ultra 9 counters in Cinebench R20 single-core with 2856 points versus 1537 for the Core 5 221E, a 46.2% lead. The PassMark single-thread test also favors the Ultra 9, with 4618 points versus 4147, a 10.2% margin. This mixed single-core picture suggests the two processors handle different single-threaded workloads with varying efficiency.
PassMark data compression shows the Ultra 9 at 631885 versus 324285 for the Core 5 221E, a 48.7% lead. Data encryption produces 48567 versus 19205, a 60.5% gap. Extended instructions scores reach 49148 versus 18216, a 62.9% difference. Prime number finding yields 460 versus 173, a 62.4% margin. Floating-point math delivers 194998 versus 79028, a 59.5% advantage. Integer math shows 155076 versus 117813, a 24% edge. Multi-thread performance reaches 56902 versus 30510, a 46.4% gap. Physics scores are 3476 versus 2230, a 35.8% margin. Random string sorting produces 77196 versus 37686, a 51.2% difference.
The average benchmark score confirms the overall picture. The Core Ultra 9 285HX averages 76155 across all benchmarks, while the Core 5 221E averages 40144. This places the Ultra 9 in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 87th percentile for the Core 5 221E. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 9 include the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX at 76212 (0.1% ahead), the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P at 76492 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX at 76513 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D at 75779 (0.5% behind). The Core 5 221E's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 at 40081 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 at 40048 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40246 (0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i9-13905H at 40313 (0.4% behind).
The Verdict
The data points to a clear split in intended use cases. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is the superior choice for multi-threaded workloads, rendering, data compression, encryption, and any application that scales across many cores. Its 24 cores and 24 threads provide a massive parallel processing advantage over the Core 5 221E's 14 cores and 20 threads. The 95th percentile ranking places it among the top performers in the database, while the Core 5 221E sits at the 87th percentile.
The Intel Core 5 221E, despite its overall lower performance, demonstrates notable strengths in specific single-core scenarios. The Cinebench R23 single-core result, where it leads by 67.4%, suggests that certain legacy or lightly threaded workloads may run faster on this processor. The Cinebench R15 single-core win by 13.8% reinforces this observation. However, the Ultra 9's wins in Cinebench R20 single-core and PassMark single-thread complicate this narrative, indicating that the Core 5 221E's single-core advantage is not universal across all benchmarks.
For users prioritizing maximum throughput in multi-threaded applications, the Core Ultra 9 285HX delivers consistently higher scores across every multi-core test in the database. The data compression advantage of 48.7% and the encryption lead of 60.5% make it particularly suited for server or workstation tasks involving heavy data processing. The Core 5 221E, with its 65 TDP versus 55 TDP for the Ultra 9, consumes more power while delivering less multi-threaded performance, which the data confirms through the benchmark scores.
The Core 5 221E's primary appeal lies in its lower core count and desktop form factor, which may suit systems where the specific single-core performance characteristics observed in Cinebench R15 and R23 are valuable. The 67.4% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core represents a significant advantage for applications that depend on that specific benchmark's workload pattern.
Architecture Differences
The manufacturing processes differ substantially. The Core 5 221E uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². The Core Ultra 9 285HX uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and a transistor count of 17,800 million. The smaller process node allows the Ultra 9 to pack more transistors into a slightly smaller die area.
The architecture and codename also differ. The Core 5 221E is based on the Bartlett Lake architecture, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-HX codename. The Core Ultra 9 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, whereas the Core 5 221E is part of the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. Both processors were released on the same date, 2025-01-12T17:00:00.000Z.
Cache hierarchies show notable differences. The Core 5 221E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285HX has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches on the Ultra 9, combined with the higher L3 capacity, contribute to its performance advantage.
Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 221E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Core Ultra 9 285HX supports only DDR5 memory, also dual-channel, with a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Both processors support ECC memory.
PCI Express capabilities vary. The Core 5 221E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 9 285HX offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 5 221E featuring UHD Graphics 730 and the Core Ultra 9 285HX featuring Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The sockets are incompatible: the Core 5 221E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX uses Intel BGA 2114.
The multiplier unlock status also differs. The Core 5 221E has a locked multiplier, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for overclocking. The market segments differ, with the Core 5 221E targeting desktop systems and the Core Ultra 9 285HX targeting mobile platforms.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads.
Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX averages 76155 across all benchmarks, while the Intel Core 5 221E averages 40144. This places the Ultra 9 at the 95th percentile and the Core 5 at the 87th percentile.
Q: In which single-core tests does the Core 5 221E win?
A: The Core 5 221E wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 368 points versus 323.5 (a 13.8% lead) and Cinebench R23 single-core with 3661 points versus 2187.5 (a 67.4% lead).
Q: Does the Core Ultra 9 285HX win any single-core tests?
A: Yes, the Core Ultra 9 285HX wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 2856 points versus 1537 (a 46.2% lead) and PassMark single-thread with 4618 points versus 4147 (a 10.2% lead).
Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?
A: The Intel Core 5 221E has a TDP of 65, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX has a TDP of 55.
Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?
A: Only the Intel Core 5 221E supports DDR4, along with DDR5. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX supports DDR5 exclusively.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX dominates in multi-threaded and data-intensive workloads. Its 15 benchmark wins cover Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, PassMark data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multi-thread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. The largest margins appear in data encryption (60.5%) and extended instructions (62.9%), indicating particular strength in cryptographic and specialized instruction workloads.
The Intel Core 5 221E wins in two single-core scenarios. Its Cinebench R23 single-core victory by 67.4% stands out as the largest single-test margin in the entire comparison. The Cinebench R15 single-core win by 13.8% suggests that applications relying on that specific benchmark's characteristics may perform better on this processor. These wins point to a potential niche in legacy software or workloads that match those benchmark patterns.
For data compression, the Ultra 9 delivers 631885 versus 324285, nearly double the throughput. For floating-point math, the Ultra 9 reaches 194998 versus 79028, more than double. The multi-thread score of 56902 versus 30510 confirms the Ultra 9's parallel processing superiority. The physics score of 3476 versus 2230 shows a 35.8% advantage, relevant for simulation workloads.
The Core 5 221E's desktop form factor with Intel Socket 1700 may suit stationary systems. The Core Ultra 9 285HX uses Intel BGA 2114, indicating a mobile platform integration. The Ultra 9's unlocked multiplier allows overclocking potential, which the Core 5 221E lacks. Both processors support ECC memory, though the Ultra 9's higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s benefits memory-intensive applications.
Specification Differences
The core and thread counts differ: the Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 221E and 2.80 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 285HX. Boost clocks reach 5.20 GHz on the Core 5 221E and 5.50 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285HX.
TDP values differ: the Core 5 221E has a TDP of 65, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX has a TDP of 55. The sockets are different, with Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 221E and Intel BGA 2114 for the Core Ultra 9 285HX. Process nodes are 10 nm for the Core 5 221E and 3 nm for the Core Ultra 9 285HX, with foundries Intel and TSMC respectively.
The Core Ultra 9 285HX has a transistor count of 17,800 million, while the Core 5 221E has no recorded transistor count. Die sizes are 257 mm² for the Core 5 221E and 243 mm² for the Core Ultra 9 285HX. Cache specifications show L1 at 80 KB per core for the Core 5 221E versus 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 9 285HX, L2 at 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core, and L3 at 24 MB shared versus 36 MB shared.
Memory support differs, with the Core 5 221E supporting DDR4 and DDR5 versus DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 9 285HX. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for the Core 5 221E and 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 9 285HX. PCIe lanes are 16 for the Core 5 221E and 20 for the Core Ultra 9 285HX, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 5 221E and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for the Core Ultra 9 285HX.
Market segments differ: desktop for the Core 5 221E and mobile for the Core Ultra 9 285HX. The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 221E and unlocked on the Core Ultra 9 285HX. The Core 5 221E has a launch MSRP of $232, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX has no recorded launch MSRP. Part numbers are SRQDVQ659 for the Core 5 221E and SRVFJ for the Core Ultra 9 285HX.