Intel Core 5 221TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 5 221TE and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is one-sided. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus takes the win. The Core 5 221TE does not secure a single victory in any measured category.

In multi-core rendering workloads, the gap is substantial. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 6656 against 1139 for the Core 5 221TE, a delta of -82.9%. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 24461 versus 4748, a -80.6% difference. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 7 reaches 44253 while the Core 5 manages 11305, which is -74.5%.

Single-core performance also favors the Ultra 7, though the margins are smaller. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the scores are 354 versus 160, a -54.8% delta. The R20 single-core test shows 3453 against 670, a -80.6% gap. In R23 single-core, the Ultra 7 scores 2439 compared to 1596, a -34.6% difference. This indicates that while the Ultra 7 leads in single-threaded tasks, the relative advantage narrows compared to the multi-core results.

The Passmark suite reveals where the Ultra 7 extends its dominance. Data compression scores are 804322 for the Ultra 7 versus 156682 for the Core 5, a -80.5% delta. Data encryption shows 59097 against 8963, a -84.8% gap. Extended instructions follow the same path: 63506 versus 9655, also -84.8%. Floating point math delivers 229491 for the Ultra 7 against 31661, a -86.2% difference. Integer math records 175986 versus 42303, a -76% delta. The prime number search test is particularly lopsided: 615 versus 59, a -90.4% gap, the largest proportional difference in the entire set.

Multithreaded performance in Passmark shows 68574 for the Ultra 7 versus 13301 for the Core 5, a -80.6% delta. Physics simulation scores 4064 against 977, a -76% difference. Random string sorting records 96945 versus 16929, a -82.5% gap. Single-thread Passmark scores are 5068 versus 1734, a -65.8% delta.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus holds an average score of 93785, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 221TE averages 17860, sitting in the 71st percentile. The Ultra 7 sits near its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6520P, with a delta of 0%. The Core 5's closest rival is the Intel Core 5 120U at -0.2%, indicating the 221TE performs at a similar level to that chip.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear separation in intended roles. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus delivers more than 5 times the average benchmark score of the Core 5 221TE (93785 versus 17860). Its 96th percentile ranking places it among the top processors in the database, while the Core 5's 71st percentile puts it in the mid-to-upper range.

For workloads that demand heavy multi-threaded throughput, such as rendering, data compression, encryption, or floating-point math, the Ultra 7 is the only choice based on these measurements. Its smallest single-core advantage, -34.6% in Cinebench R23, still represents a meaningful lead in lightly threaded applications.

The Core 5 221TE, however, offers a functional desktop experience for tasks that do not push extreme parallel performance. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT with a delta of -0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 at -0.7%. These comparisons show the Core 5 performing in line with established mid-range desktop chips.

Strictly from the recorded data, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins every measurable category. The Core 5 221TE does not present a single benchmark where it outperforms the Ultra 7. For any user selecting between these two based on performance alone, the Ultra 7 is the superior part across the board.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing approaches. The Core 5 221TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename with a generation label of Core 5, built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus belongs to the Arrow Lake Refresh codename within the Core Ultra Series 2, manufactured on a 3 nm process node by TSMC. The transistor count for the Ultra 7 is recorded as 17,800 million, while the Core 5's transistor count is not listed in the database. Die sizes differ: the Core 5 measures 215 mm², the Ultra 7 measures 243 mm².

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The Core 5 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. Core counts also differ: the Core 5 has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Ultra 7 does not use simultaneous multithreading, as its thread count equals its core count.

Memory support differs. The Core 5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but bandwidth figures are distinct: the Core 5 records 76.8 GB/s, the Ultra 7 records 115.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 5 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are different: the Core 5 uses UHD Graphics 730, the Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 uses Intel Socket 1700, the Ultra 7 uses Intel Socket 1851. The multiplier is locked on the Core 5, while the Ultra 7 has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two parts:

• Cores: 10 (Core 5) versus 24 (Ultra 7)
• Threads: 16 (Core 5) versus 24 (Ultra 7)
• Base clock: 1.80 GHz (Core 5) versus 3.70 GHz (Ultra 7)
• Boost clock: 5.00 GHz (Core 5) versus 5.50 GHz (Ultra 7)
• TDP: 45 W (Core 5) versus 125 W (Ultra 7)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 5) versus Intel Socket 1851 (Ultra 7)
• Codename: Bartlett Lake (Core 5) versus Arrow Lake Refresh (Ultra 7)
• Process node: 10 nm (Core 5) versus 3 nm (Ultra 7)
• Foundry: Intel (Core 5) versus TSMC (Ultra 7)
• Transistors: not listed (Core 5) versus 17,800 million (Ultra 7)
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core (Core 5) versus 192 KB per core (Ultra 7)
• L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core (Core 5) versus 3 MB per core (Ultra 7)
• L3 cache: 24 MB shared (Core 5) versus 36 MB shared (Ultra 7)
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 5) versus DDR5 (Ultra 7)
• Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s (Core 5) versus 115.2 GB/s (Ultra 7)
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 lanes (Core 5) versus Gen 5, 20 lanes (Ultra 7)
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 (Core 5) versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU (Ultra 7)
• Release date: 2025-01-12 (Core 5) versus 2026-03-10 (Ultra 7)
• Launch MSRP: $232 (Core 5) versus $299 (Ultra 7)
• Multiplier unlocked: false (Core 5) versus true (Ultra 7)
• Part number: SRVQS (Core 5) versus SA4V6 (Ultra 7)

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785, compared to 17860 for the Intel Core 5 221TE.

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

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 44253 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core 5 221TE scores 11305, a delta of -74.5%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 5 221TE and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus support ECC memory.

Q: What is the difference in core counts?

A: The Intel Core 5 221TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 221TE has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Are the sockets interchangeable?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 221TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. This includes all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) for both single-core and multi-core, as well as all Passmark tests: data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number search, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread.

The largest margin for the Ultra 7 appears in the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where it leads by -90.4%. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it leads by -34.6%. These results indicate that the Ultra 7 is particularly strong in compute-intensive, parallel workloads, while its single-core advantage, though still decisive, is comparatively narrower.

The Intel Core 5 221TE does not record a single win in the head-to-head data. However, its specifications suggest a role in systems where the requirements are more modest. Its lower TDP (45 W versus 125 W), support for DDR4 memory, and smaller physical footprint (215 mm² die size) align with a mainstream desktop segment. The database shows its nearest rivals as the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, Intel Core 5 120U, Intel Core 7 350, and AMD Ryzen 5 1600, with deltas ranging from -0.7% to 0.5%. This places the Core 5 in a performance class that is entirely different from the Ultra 7.

For use cases such as basic productivity, light multitasking, or legacy software that does not scale across many cores, the Core 5 221TE may suffice. For any workload that benefits from high core counts, large caches, or maximum single-thread speed, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the processor that the benchmark data supports. The 96th percentile ranking of the Ultra 7 versus the 71st percentile of the Core 5 summarizes the overall separation in capability.