Intel Core 5 223PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear split between the Intel Core 5 223PE and the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H, with the desktop part winning 13 of the 17 recorded comparisons while the mobile chip takes 4. The most decisive victory belongs to the Core 5 223PE in PassMark integer math, where it scores 99,819 against 62,070 for the Core Ultra 5 336H, a massive 60.8% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the entire head-to-head set and indicates a substantial difference in raw integer throughput, likely reflecting the Core 5 223PE's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz compared to 4.60 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 336H.

The Cinebench suite tells a consistent story. Across all three versions (R15, R20, and R23), the Core 5 223PE wins both multicore and singlecore tests by a nearly identical margin of 10.2% to 10.3%. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 5 223PE posts 26,455 versus 23,991 for the Core Ultra 5 336H. The singlecore R23 result shows 3,734 against 3,387. These margins are uniform, suggesting the clock speed advantage of the Core 5 223PE translates directly into sustained rendering performance without any throttling penalty in the measured workload.

Data compression is another strong win for the Core 5 223PE. Its PassMark score of 346,623 beats the Core Ultra 5 336H's 280,340 by 23.6%. This workload benefits from the larger 24 MB shared L3 cache on the Core 5 223PE versus 18 MB on the Core Ultra 5 336H, combined with the higher clock speeds. Random string sorting also favors the Core 5 223PE, though by a smaller 4.1% margin (35,798 versus 34,402), indicating that the cache hierarchy advantage is less impactful for that particular operation.

The Core Ultra 5 336H fights back in several specialized workloads. Its largest win comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 299 against 159 for the Core 5 223PE, a 46.8% advantage. This is a dramatic reversal and suggests the Panther Lake architecture's integer division or modular arithmetic pipelines are significantly more efficient per clock. Data encryption also goes to the Core Ultra 5 336H by 13.4% (21,291 versus 18,448), likely reflecting dedicated cryptographic acceleration instructions in the newer architecture.

Floating point math and physics favor the Core Ultra 5 336H by smaller margins. Floating point shows 82,415 versus 76,468, a 7.2% edge, while physics shows 2,682 versus 2,493, a 7% edge. These results indicate that the Core Ultra 5 336H's 3 nm process node and Panther Lake architecture deliver better FPU efficiency despite the lower clock speeds. Extended instructions are essentially a tie, with the Core 5 223PE edging ahead by only 0.5% (24,672 versus 24,542).

The multithread PassMark score goes to the Core 5 223PE at 31,124 versus 28,545, a 9% margin. This is noteworthy because the Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 5 223PE has only 8 cores but 16 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. Despite having half the physical cores, the Core 5 223PE's higher clocks and larger cache allow it to outperform the mobile part in this aggregated multithread test. Single-thread performance also favors the Core 5 223PE by 5.1% (4,219 versus 4,013), consistent with its 0.6 GHz boost clock advantage.

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the Intel Core 5 223PE as the stronger all-around performer in most conventional workloads. Its 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs exceeds the Core Ultra 5 336H's 84th percentile. The average benchmark score of 40,585 for the Core 5 223PE versus 34,485 for the Core Ultra 5 336H puts the desktop part roughly 17.7% ahead on the aggregate metric. The nearest rivals list confirms this standing: the Core 5 223PE sits within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G and within 0.2% of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, while the Core Ultra 5 336H trades leads with the Intel Core i7-13700HX (0.2% behind) and the Intel Core i5-13450HX (0.4% ahead).

The Core Ultra 5 336H, however, demonstrates that architectural efficiency can overcome clock disadvantages in specific domains. Its 46.8% win in prime number finding and 13.4% win in encryption are not marginal effects; they indicate the Panther Lake microarchitecture has meaningful IPC improvements in those instruction paths. The 3 nm process node also enables a 25 W TDP versus 65 W for the Core 5 223PE, a substantial power efficiency gap that the benchmarks do not directly capture but which matters for the intended usage.

For users prioritizing rendering, compression, integer workloads, and general multitasking, the Core 5 223PE is the clear choice based on the data. For workloads involving cryptographic operations, prime number computation, floating point math, and physics simulation, the Core Ultra 5 336H delivers superior results. The choice between these two parts should follow the dominant workload, not the aggregate score.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 223PE dominates the Cinebench family, winning all six recorded tests by roughly 10.3%. This covers both single-core and multi-core rendering workloads, making it the preferred part for 3D modeling, video encoding, and any application that relies on sustained multi-threaded CPU rendering. Its PassMark multithread score of 31,124 also indicates strong performance in heavily threaded productivity suites. Data compression at 346,623 and integer math at 99,819 round out a profile suited to file archiving, database operations, and general office productivity with large spreadsheets or code compilation.

The Core Ultra 5 336H claims the specialized computation wins. Prime number finding at 299 is more than double the Core 5 223PE's 159, which matters for mathematical modeling, cryptography research, and certain scientific computing tasks. Data encryption at 21,291 beats 18,448, making the mobile part preferable for security-focused applications, VPN throughput, and disk encryption scenarios. Floating point math at 82,415 versus 76,468 and physics at 2,682 versus 2,493 position the Core Ultra 5 336H as the better option for scientific simulation, finite element analysis, and physics engines in engineering software.

The 4.1% win in random string sorting for the Core 5 223PE suggests it handles data organization tasks slightly better, while the 0.5% extended instructions margin is negligible and should not drive a purchasing decision. The Core Ultra 5 336H's 16 physical cores without Hyper-Threading deliver 16 threads, while the Core 5 223PE achieves 16 threads from 8 physical cores with Hyper-Threading. In workloads that scale with physical cores rather than threads, the Core Ultra 5 336H may exhibit different scaling characteristics, though the benchmark data shows the Core 5 223PE still wins the aggregate multithread test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PE wins all three single-core Cinebench tests by 10.2% to 10.3%, scoring 376 in R15, 1,568 in R20, and 3,734 in R23. The PassMark single-thread test also favors the Core 5 223PE at 4,219 versus 4,013, a 5.1% margin.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core rendering?

A: The Core 5 223PE leads in every Cinebench multicore test: 2,666 versus 2,418 in R15, 11,111 versus 10,076 in R20, and 26,455 versus 23,991 in R23, each representing a 10.3% advantage.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The Core Ultra 5 336H has a 25 W TDP compared to 65 W for the Core 5 223PE, making it the lower-power part. The Core Ultra 5 336H also uses a 3 nm process node versus 10 nm for the Core 5 223PE.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark integer math, where the Core 5 223PE scores 99,819 versus 62,070 for the Core Ultra 5 336H, a 60.8% advantage. The Core Ultra 5 336H's biggest win is in prime number finding at 299 versus 159, a 46.8% margin.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 5 223PE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Core Ultra 5 336H has higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 5 223PE.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core Ultra 5 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the Core 5 223PE uses UHD Graphics 730. The benchmark data does not include graphics tests, so relative GPU performance cannot be determined from the recorded results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design approaches from Intel. The Core 5 223PE uses the Bartlett Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 5 336H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Core 5 223PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Core 5 223PE relies on Hyper-Threading to reach 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has each physical core running a single thread. The base clocks also differ, with the Core 5 223PE running at 2.90 GHz and the Core Ultra 5 336H at 1.90 GHz. Boost clocks favor the Core 5 223PE at 5.20 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

Cache hierarchies show different strategies. The Core 5 223PE 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 5 336H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The larger L3 on the Core 5 223PE likely contributes to its compression and integer math advantages, while the larger per-core L1 and L2 on the Core Ultra 5 336H may explain its efficiency in prime number and encryption workloads.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 5 223PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel configuration and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the Core 5 223PE but not on the Core Ultra 5 336H, which matters for reliability-sensitive applications.

PCIe connectivity differs: the Core 5 223PE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 336H offers Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The socket types are incompatible, with the Core 5 223PE using Intel Socket 1700 for desktop platforms and the Core Ultra 5 336H using Intel BGA 2540 for mobile systems. Integrated graphics also differ, with UHD Graphics 730 on the desktop part and Intel Xe3 Graphics on the mobile part.

The market segments confirm the intended use cases: desktop for the Core 5 223PE and mobile for the Core Ultra 5 336H. The Core 5 223PE has a launch MSRP of $232 and released in March 2026, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has no recorded launch MSRP and released in January 2026. Both have locked multipliers and are in active production. The Core 5 223PE part number is SA4QF, and the Core Ultra 5 336H part number is SA4RD.