Intel Core 5 221TE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus delivers an average benchmark score of 79,574, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 221TE averages 17,860, which puts it in the 71st percentile.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor offer?

A: The Core 5 221TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Ultra 9 does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds?

A: The Core 5 221TE runs at a 1.80 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.00 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a 2.70 GHz base clock and a 5.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 24 MB on the Core 5 221TE. Per-core L2 cache also differs, with 3 MB per core on the Ultra 9 versus 1.25 MB per core on the Core 5.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The Core 5 221TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports only DDR5. Both are dual-channel, but memory bandwidth differs: 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 and 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 9.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a 55 W TDP, while the Core 5 221TE has a 45 W TDP. The Ultra 9 also has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Core 5 does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families with distinct design goals. The Core 5 221TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 215 mm² die size. It is a desktop part using Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. Its die measures 243 mm² and it uses a mobile socket, Intel BGA 2114.

The Core Ultra 9 packs 17,800 million transistors, a figure not listed for the Core 5. The process node difference is significant: 3 nm versus 10 nm, which explains part of the performance gap. The Ultra 9 also uses a larger L1 cache at 192 KB per core versus 80 KB per core, and the L2 cache is 3 MB per core versus 1.25 MB per core. Total L3 cache is 36 MB on the Ultra 9 versus 24 MB on the Core 5.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 221TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Both support ECC memory, but the Core 5 accepts DDR4 and DDR5 while the Ultra 9 is DDR5-only. PCIe lane counts differ: 16 lanes on the Core 5 versus 20 lanes on the Ultra 9, both Gen 5 for CPU-attached lanes.

The release dates are separated by over a year. The Core 5 arrived in January 2025, and the Core Ultra 9 in March 2026. The Core 5 has a launch MSRP of $232; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 9.

Where Each One Wins

The data is one-sided. In all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins. The Core 5 221TE does not take a single benchmark in the comparison set. That does not make the Core 5 irrelevant, but its role is clearly different.

The Core 5 221TE is a desktop processor with a 45 W TDP, a 10-core / 16-thread configuration, and a 71st percentile standing. It fits into Socket 1700 systems and supports older DDR4 memory alongside DDR5. For builders with existing DDR4 platforms or those needing a lower-power desktop chip, it remains a functional option. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock gives it reasonable single-thread capability for everyday tasks, though the benchmark scores show it trails the Ultra 9 substantially even in single-thread tests.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a mobile flagship. It uses a 55 W TDP, has 24 cores and 24 threads, and sits in the 95th percentile. Its 5.50 GHz boost clock and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the clear choice for heavy multi-threaded workloads. The unlocked multiplier also allows overclocking, which is not possible on the Core 5.

For single-thread responsiveness, the Ultra 9 leads by a wide margin. For multi-thread rendering, compression, encryption, and math workloads, it dominates even more. The Core 5 wins no categories in this dataset, but its lower TDP and desktop socket may appeal to users who prioritize platform compatibility over raw performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 221TE | Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus |

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

| Cores | 10 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base clock | 1.80 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die size | 215 mm² | 243 mm² |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 24 MB shared | 36 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe lanes (CPU) | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

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

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | $232 | Not listed |

The two differ in nearly every major specification. The Ultra 9 has more cores, higher clocks, more cache, a smaller process node, higher memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and a newer graphics solution. The Core 5 supports DDR4, which the Ultra 9 does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results show a consistent and often massive advantage for the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 9 scores 5,981 versus 1,139 for the Core 5, a delta of 81% in favor of the Ultra 9. Single-core in R15 shows 340 versus 160, a 52.9% lead.

Cinebench R20 widens the gap. Multi-core sees 21,198 versus 4,748, a 77.6% difference. Single-core is 2,992 versus 670, also a 77.6% lead. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 9 scores 39,684 against 11,305, a 71.5% advantage. Single-core R23 is 2,356 versus 1,596, which is a 32.3% lead, the smallest margin in the entire set.

PassMark tests show even larger deltas. Data compression favors the Ultra 9 by 76.2% with scores of 658,724 versus 156,682. Data encryption shows an 82.1% lead, 50,008 versus 8,963. Extended instructions see the Ultra 9 at 51,290 versus 9,655, an 81.2% gap. Finding prime numbers is the most lopsided test: 519 versus 59, an 88.6% difference.

Floating point math shows 201,773 versus 31,661, an 84.3% lead. Integer math is 164,839 versus 42,303, a 74.3% gap. PassMark multithread scores 59,439 versus 13,301, a 77.6% difference. Physics tests show 3,387 versus 977, a 71.2% lead. Random string sorting is 80,327 versus 16,929, a 78.9% gap. Single-thread PassMark has the Ultra 9 at 4,951 versus 1,734, a 65% advantage.

Across all 17 tests, the smallest winning margin is 32.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core. The largest is 88.6% in prime number finding. The Ultra 9 wins every test by a substantial amount, and in most multi-threaded workloads the lead exceeds 70%.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is in a different performance class. It wins all 17 recorded benchmarks, with margins ranging from 32.3% to 88.6%. Its 95th percentile standing versus the Core 5's 71st percentile reflects a processor designed for maximum throughput in a mobile form factor.

The Core 5 221TE remains a viable desktop part for users on Intel Socket 1700 who want DDR4 compatibility and a 45 W TDP. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock and 10 cores handle mainstream workloads, and its 71st percentile average places it near the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, which scores 17,891 with a 0.2% difference. That is a respectable position for a mid-range desktop chip.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus sits alongside the Intel Core i9-14900KF in the database, with the Ultra 9 scoring 79,574 versus 79,371 for the i9, a 0.3% lead. It also edges out the Core i9-14900K, which scores 79,097, a 0.6% difference. This places the Ultra 9 among the fastest processors recorded, despite being a mobile part.

Buyers should choose based on platform and workload. Those building a desktop on Socket 1700 with existing DDR4 memory will find the Core 5 221TE a capable option, especially at its $232 launch MSRP. Those who need maximum multi-threaded performance, higher memory bandwidth, and the latest process node should select the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, provided the mobile BGA 2114 socket fits their system design. The benchmark data leaves no ambiguity about which processor delivers more performance.