Intel Core 5 221TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

The Intel Core 5 221TE and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H represent two distinctly different design philosophies from Intel, one aimed at the desktop and the other at high-performance mobile systems. The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between them, with the Core Ultra 5 338H dominating every single benchmark in the comparison. With an average benchmark score of 33989, the Core Ultra 5 338H sits in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 221TE, with an average score of 17860, lands in the 71st percentile. This disparity is not marginal; it is consistent across synthetic rendering tests, integer and floating-point workloads, and memory-intensive tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results leave no ambiguity about which processor is faster. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, and in many cases, the margin is substantial. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 338H scores 16331 against the Core 5 221TE's 11305, a delta of 30.8 percent. This advantage expands dramatically in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the mobile part scores 10213 versus 4748, a 53.5 percent lead. The single-core performance gap is also pronounced, with the Core Ultra 5 338H posting 2044 in Cinebench R23 single-core compared to 1596 for the Core 5 221TE, a 21.9 percent difference.

The Passmark suite reinforces this pattern. In floating-point math, the Core Ultra 5 338H scores 84067, which is 62.3 percent higher than the 31661 posted by the Core 5 221TE. Data compression favors the Core Ultra 5 338H by 43.3 percent, with scores of 276539 versus 156682. The largest relative gap appears in the prime number search test, where the Core Ultra 5 338H scores 304 against just 59 for the Core 5 221TE, a staggering 80.6 percent difference. Encryption workloads also show a major separation: 21367 for the Core Ultra 5 338H versus 8963 for the Core 5 221TE, a 58.1 percent delta.

The multi-threaded Passmark score tells the same story, with the Core Ultra 5 338H reaching 28717 compared to 13301 for the Core 5 221TE, a 53.7 percent advantage. Random string sorting yields a 50.3 percent lead for the Core Ultra 5 338H (34082 versus 16929). Even in integer math, where the Core 5 221TE performs relatively better than in other tests, it still trails by 34.9 percent, scoring 64934 for the Core Ultra 5 338H and 42303 for the Core 5 221TE. The extended instructions test shows a 59.6 percent difference, and physics simulation shows a 63.8 percent gap.

Where Each One Wins

Given that the Core Ultra 5 338H wins every recorded benchmark, the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of its margins rather than by any workload where the Core 5 221TE takes the lead. The Core Ultra 5 338H is clearly the stronger choice for heavily multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16331 and Passmark multi-thread score of 28717 indicate strong performance in rendering, video encoding, and other parallel tasks. The 80.6 percent lead in prime number search, a workload sensitive to integer throughput and memory latency, suggests that the Core Ultra 5 338H also handles computationally dense algorithms with far greater efficiency.

The Core 5 221TE is not without its merits, but they are not visible in raw performance. It offers ECC memory support, a feature absent from the Core Ultra 5 338H, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, which allows for desktop integration with standard DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its 45-watt TDP is higher than the 25-watt TDP of the Core Ultra 5 338H, which is expected for a desktop part. The Core 5 221TE also provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, compared to 4 lanes on the Core Ultra 5 338H, making it the more suitable option for systems that need extensive expansion capability, such as multiple discrete GPUs or high-speed storage adapters.

The Core Ultra 5 338H, as a mobile processor with a 25-watt TDP, is designed for laptops and compact systems where power efficiency is paramount. Its 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth, supported by LPDDR5X memory, is significantly higher than the 76.8 GB/s of the Core 5 221TE, which gives it a substantial advantage in memory-bound workloads. The Arc B370 integrated graphics is a more capable iGPU than the UHD Graphics 730 found in the Core 5 221TE, making the Core Ultra 5 338H better suited for light gaming and media tasks without a discrete GPU.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The Core 5 221TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is manufactured on a 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the 3 nm node gives the Core Ultra 5 338H a transistor density and power efficiency advantage that the benchmark scores reflect.

The core configurations differ in both count and threading. The Core 5 221TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating that some cores support Hyper-Threading. The Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads, meaning it relies on physical cores without simultaneous multi-threading. Despite having fewer threads, the Core Ultra 5 338H still outperforms the Core 5 221TE in every multi-threaded test, a result attributable to its newer architecture and higher memory bandwidth.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 5 221TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 338H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 338H provides more per-core cache, which helps with single-threaded and latency-sensitive workloads, while the Core 5 221TE has a larger total L3 pool, which can benefit certain shared-data workloads.

Memory support is another key differentiator. The Core 5 221TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 338H supports only LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, but with a bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. The Core 5 221TE supports ECC memory, a critical feature for reliability-focused desktop or workstation builds. The Core Ultra 5 338H does not. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the Core 5 221TE offers 16 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 338H offers only 4.

The Core 5 221TE is a desktop processor with a 45-watt TDP, a base clock of 1.80 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 338H is a mobile processor with a 25-watt TDP, a base clock of 1.90 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 338H has a higher base clock but a lower boost clock, yet it still wins all single-threaded tests, indicating that architectural efficiency matters more than raw clock speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an average benchmark score of 33989, while the Intel Core 5 221TE has an average score of 17860.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core Ultra 5 338H scores 16331 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 30.8 percent higher than the 11305 scored by the Core 5 221TE.

Q: Does the Core 5 221TE support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core 5 221TE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 338H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two CPUs?

A: The Core 5 221TE is manufactured on a 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 338H is manufactured on a 3 nm process.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 338H has a memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s, compared to 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 221TE.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Core 5 221TE has a TDP of 45 watts, and the Core Ultra 5 338H has a TDP of 25 watts.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the faster processor in every measured workload. Its 84th percentile ranking against all CPUs, compared to the 71st percentile for the Core 5 221TE, places it in a higher performance tier. The Core Ultra 5 338H also sits near the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H in the database, with a delta of 0.3 percent, and is 0.4 percent ahead of the Intel Xeon 6353P. The Core 5 221TE, by contrast, trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, sitting 0.2 percent behind it, and is 0.5 percent behind the Intel Core 7 350.

For users who prioritize raw compute performance in a mobile or power-constrained form factor, the Core Ultra 5 338H is the obvious choice. Its 3 nm architecture, higher memory bandwidth, and superior benchmark scores make it the stronger part for rendering, encryption, and multi-threaded productivity. The Core 5 221TE, however, serves a different purpose. It is a desktop processor with ECC memory support, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and DDR4/DDR5 compatibility. These features make it suitable for reliable, expandable desktop systems where maximum performance is not the only criterion.

The Core Ultra 5 338H costs more in terms of platform requirements, but its performance advantage is so large that the Core 5 221TE cannot compete on speed. The Core 5 221TE has a launch MSRP of $232. The Core Ultra 5 338H has no recorded launch MSRP. The Core 5 221TE is the pick for desktop users who need ECC, expansion, and a socketed platform. The Core Ultra 5 338H is the pick for anyone who needs the fastest possible performance in a mobile package, and it also happens to deliver that performance while drawing 20 watts less power. The benchmark data supports only one conclusion: the Core Ultra 5 338H is the superior processor in almost every measurable way, with the Core 5 221TE retaining relevance only for its platform features and desktop integration.