Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Comparison

The Verdict

The data separates these two Intel desktop processors clearly by workload class. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K dominates the multicore and throughput-oriented benchmark suite, winning 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core 5 221E wins only 2 tests, both in Cinebench single-core scenarios, but those wins reveal a specific niche.

The Core Ultra 9 285K is the processor for compute-heavy tasks: rendering, encryption, compression, physics simulation, and integer or floating-point math. Its average benchmark score of 83807 places it at the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, scoring 84003 (a delta of -0.2%). The Core 5 221E, by contrast, sits at the 87th percentile with an average score of 40144, placing it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (40081) and 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (40048).

The Core 5 221E should be selected when the workload prioritizes single-threaded Cinebench performance per watt or when platform compatibility with DDR4 memory is required. The Core Ultra 9 285K is the clear choice for maximum multicore throughput, as its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42522 is 64% higher than the 221E's 25933. The 285K also requires DDR5 only, while the 221E accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, which affects platform cost and upgrade paths beyond raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and manufacturing approaches. The Core 5 221E uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². The Core Ultra 9 285K uses the Arrow Lake-S codename and Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node by TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The 221E provides 14 cores and 20 threads, while the 285K provides 24 cores and 24 threads. The 285K does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count. The 221E relies on Hyper-Threading to reach 20 threads from 14 cores.

Cache hierarchy also differs. The 221E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The 285K has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches on the 285K support its higher core count and wider execution resources.

Memory support separates the platforms. The 221E supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The 285K supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the 221E provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the 285K provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ: the 221E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the 285K uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The 285K has an unlocked multiplier, while the 221E does not. The 285K uses Intel Socket 1851, while the 221E uses Intel Socket 1700. The 285K launched on October 23, 2024, with a launch MSRP of $589; the 221E launched on January 12, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $232.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 9 285K wins every Passmark test recorded in the head-to-head data. The largest margin appears in Passmark extended instructions, where the 285K scores 62277 against the 221E's 18216, a delta of -70.8% from the 221E's perspective. Passmark data encryption shows a 66.7% gap (57745 vs 19205), and Passmark floating point math shows a 64.8% gap (224324 vs 79028). Passmark find prime numbers gives the 285K a 68% advantage (541 vs 173), and Passmark random string sorting shows a 60.3% gap (94927 vs 37686).

Cinebench multicore results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 285K scores 6494 against 2613, a 59.8% delta. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 24003 vs 10891, a 54.6% delta. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 42522 vs 25933, a 39% delta. Passmark multithread shows 67260 vs 30510, a 54.6% delta. Passmark integer math shows 172379 vs 117813, a 31.7% delta. Passmark physics shows 3938 vs 2230, a 43.4% delta.

The Core 5 221E wins two single-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the 221E scores 368 against 359, a 2.5% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 221E scores 3661 against 2377, a 54% delta. However, the 285K wins Passmark single-thread with 5087 against 4147, an 18.5% delta. The 285K also wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 3388 against 1537, a 54.6% delta. The single-core picture is mixed: the 221E leads in two Cinebench sub-tests, but the 285K leads in the other single-thread measurements.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an average benchmark score of 83807, while the Intel Core 5 221E has 40144. The 285K sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the 221E sits at the 87th percentile.

Q: Does the Core 5 221E beat the Core Ultra 9 285K in any test?

A: Yes, the 221E wins two head-to-head tests: Cinebench R15 single-core (368 vs 359, a 2.5% delta) and Cinebench R23 single-core (3661 vs 2377, a 54% delta). The 285K wins the other 15 recorded tests.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Core Ultra 9 285K has 24 cores and 24 threads. The 285K does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 221E supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports DDR5 only. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The 221E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The 285K has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 221E has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The 285K also has a higher base clock at 3.70 GHz versus 2.70 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 285K wins in every throughput-heavy category recorded. Its Passmark data compression score of 790052 dwarfs the 221E's 324285, which makes it the choice for archiving, backup, and database workloads that rely on compression. Its Passmark data encryption score of 57745 against 19205 indicates a large advantage for disk encryption, VPN traffic, or secure communication workloads. Extended instruction workloads, represented by the 62277 versus 18216 gap, favor the 285K for AVX-class operations common in scientific and media processing.

Multithreaded rendering favors the 285K decisively. Cinebench R23 multicore at 42522 versus 25933, and Cinebench R20 multicore at 24003 versus 10891, confirm that the 285K handles long-duration render jobs with substantially more throughput. Passmark physics at 3938 versus 2230 indicates better performance in simulation and physics-based applications. Passmark integer math at 172379 versus 117813 and floating point math at 224324 versus 79028 show the 285K leads in both arithmetic categories, with the floating point gap being particularly wide.

The Core 5 221E wins in specific single-core Cinebench tests. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3661 against 2377 is a 54% advantage, and its Cinebench R15 single-core score of 368 against 359 is a 2.5% edge. These results suggest the 221E has a higher single-core Cinebench efficiency profile, which may matter for lightly threaded legacy applications that rely on Cinebench-style rendering workloads. However, the 285K counters with a 54.6% win in Cinebench R20 single-core (3388 vs 1537) and an 18.5% win in Passmark single-thread (5087 vs 4147), so the 221E's single-core advantage is not universal.

The 221E also wins on platform flexibility because it supports DDR4 memory, which the 285K does not. For systems that must reuse DDR4 modules, the 221E is the only viable choice between these two. The 285K's higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s, combined with its larger L3 cache of 36 MB versus 24 MB, supports its multicore dominance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 221E | Intel Core Ultra 9 285K |

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

| Cores | 14 | 24 |

| Threads | 20 | 24 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.70 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die size | 257 mm² | 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) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-10-23 |