Intel Core i5-10210U vs Intel Core i9-13900E Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core i9-13900E is the decisive winner in every recorded benchmark. It takes all eight head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from a 35.7% lead in Geekbench single-core to a 576.4% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core. For any workload that benefits from raw compute throughput, the i9-13900E is the only rational choice from this pairing.

The Intel Core i5-10210U is a mobile part from 2019, now marked end-of-life. It has no wins in this comparison. Its role is not to compete with the i9-13900E, but to serve as a reference point for how far the desktop platform has moved. The data indicates that the i5-10210U is suited for light, power-constrained tasks where its 25 W TDP matters, but if performance is the criterion, the i9-13900E wins outright.

Pick the i9-13900E if you need multi-threaded rendering, heavy compilation, or any sustained compute load. Pick the i5-10210U only if you are constrained to a low-power mobile socket and cannot use a desktop platform.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-13900E wins in every category measured. In multi-core tests, the margin is enormous: Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 568.6% advantage (34244 vs 5122). Even in single-core, where the i5-10210U should theoretically be closer due to its higher boost clock relative to its core count, the i9-13900E still leads by 568.6% in Cinebench R23 single-core (4834 vs 723). The smallest gap is in Geekbench single-core, where the i9-13900E leads by 35.7% (1646 vs 1213), indicating that the older architecture's single-thread performance is less far behind than its multi-thread performance.

The i5-10210U has no benchmark wins. Its only advantage is contextual: it is a mobile chip with a 25 W TDP, compared to the i9-13900E's 65 W TDP. If the use case is a thin-and-light laptop with no cooling headroom, the i5-10210U is the only option that fits the socket and power envelope. But for any performance metric, the i9-13900E is ahead.

Architecture Differences

The i9-13900E is built on Raptor Lake, a 10 nm process from Intel, with a 257 mm² die size. It has 24 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 1800 MHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is substantial: 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, includes ECC memory support, and features PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770.

The i5-10210U is built on Comet Lake, a 14 nm process, with no die size recorded. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 1600 MHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. Its cache is much smaller: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. It supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory, has no ECC support, and no PCIe lane data is recorded. Integrated graphics are simply listed as UHD Graphics.

The architecture gap is clear: the i9-13900E uses a newer process node (10 nm vs 14 nm), has six times the cores, over four times the threads, and six times the shared L3 cache (36 MB vs 6 MB). The i9-13900E also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i5-10210U. The i9-13900E is a desktop part on Socket 1700, while the i5-10210U is a mobile part on BGA 1440. The i9-13900E is still in active production; the i5-10210U is end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Is the i9-13900E faster than the i5-10210U in all benchmarks?

A: Yes. The i9-13900E wins all eight head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 35.7% (Geekbench single-core) to 576.4% (Cinebench R15 single-core).

Q: How big is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-13900E scores 34244 versus 5122 for the i5-10210U, a 568.6% difference. Geekbench multi-core shows 8337 versus 3054, a 173% lead.

Q: Does the i5-10210U have any advantage?

A: The only recorded advantage is power consumption: the i5-10210U has a 25 W TDP versus 65 W for the i9-13900E. It also uses a mobile socket (BGA 1440) versus the desktop Socket 1700, so it fits different hardware.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The i9-13900E supports ECC memory. The i5-10210U does not.

Q: What are the memory compatibility differences?

A: The i9-13900E supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode. The i5-10210U supports DDR3 and DDR4, with no memory bus data recorded.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: The i9-13900E is at the 65th percentile of all CPUs, and the i5-10210U is at the 64th percentile. Despite the massive benchmark gaps, their average benchmark scores (8676 vs 8344) are close because the i5-10210U has additional PassMark tests recorded that the i9-13900E lacks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the i9-13900E comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 487 versus 72, a delta of 576.4%. That is the single biggest percentage margin in the entire comparison. The multi-core R15 test is nearly identical in relative terms: 3451 versus 516, a 568.8% lead.

Cinebench R20 and R23 follow the same pattern. In R20 multi-core, the i9-13900E scores 14382 versus 2151, a 568.6% lead. In R20 single-core, it is 2030 versus 303, a 570% lead. In R23 multi-core, 34244 versus 5122, a 568.6% lead. In R23 single-core, 4834 versus 723, again 568.6%. The consistency of these deltas suggests a fixed architectural advantage that scales uniformly across the Cinebench suite.

Geekbench shows a different picture. The multi-core test gives the i9-13900E an 8337 score versus 3054, a 173% lead. That is lower than the Cinebench margins, indicating that Geekbench's workload is less sensitive to core count scaling. The single-core test shows the smallest gap: 1646 versus 1213, a 35.7% lead. This suggests that the i5-10210U's 4.20 GHz boost clock allows it to stay competitive on lightly threaded integer work, but the i9-13900E's newer architecture and higher 5.20 GHz boost still win clearly.

The i9-13900E wins all eight head-to-head tests. The i5-10210U has zero wins. If you are comparing these two for a specific task, the i9-13900E will be faster in every measured category, with the smallest margin being a 35.7% single-core advantage.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every specification field. Core count: 24 versus 4. Threads: 32 versus 8. Base clock: 1800 MHz versus 1600 MHz. Boost clock: 5.20 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. TDP: 65 W versus 25 W. Socket: Socket 1700 versus BGA 1440. Process node: 10 nm versus 14 nm.

Cache is a major differentiator. The i9-13900E has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The i5-10210U has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Each per-core cache is larger on the i9-13900E, and the shared L3 is six times larger.

Memory support also diverges. The i9-13900E supports DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel, with ECC. The i5-10210U supports DDR3 and DDR4, with no ECC and no memory bus data. PCIe is another difference: the i9-13900E has Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the i5-10210U has no PCIe data recorded.

Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 770 on the i9-13900E versus UHD Graphics on the i5-10210U. Market segment differs: Desktop versus Mobile. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release dates: the i9-13900E launched in January 2023, the i5-10210U in August 2019. Neither CPU has a recorded launch MSRP. Both have locked multipliers.

The die size is recorded only for the i9-13900E at 257 mm²; no die size is available for the i5-10210U. The i9-13900E has a part number (SRMG2), while the i5-10210U does not. In summary, the i9-13900E is a newer, larger, faster, and more feature-rich desktop processor, while the i5-10210U is an older, smaller, slower mobile chip with a lower power draw.