AMD Ryzen 3 210 vs Intel Core 5 211TE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 and Intel Core 5 211TE split their 17 benchmark comparisons almost evenly, with Intel taking 9 wins and AMD taking 8. However, the nature of those wins reveals a clear use-case separation: the Intel part dominates in traditional rendering workloads and physics simulation, while the AMD part shows decisive advantages in data processing, encryption, and single-threaded throughput.

The Intel Core 5 211TE wins every Cinebench test across R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. Its multi-core lead is consistent at 8.2% across all three Cinebench versions, indicating a structural advantage in rendering workloads rather than a workload-specific quirk. The Intel part also wins PassMark physics by a massive 35.8% (1278 vs 821), suggesting its core configuration handles physics simulation substantially better.

The AMD Ryzen 3 210 wins the opposite category of workloads. It leads in PassMark data compression by 13.9% (152017 vs 133434), data encryption by 19% (8607 vs 7231), extended instructions by 33.1% (11464 vs 8615), and random string sorting by 31.1% (19454 vs 14838). The Ryzen also wins integer math by 11.6% (37933 vs 33991) and multithread by 16.3% (13585 vs 11685).

The most striking result is in PassMark single-thread performance, where the Ryzen 3 210 scores 3724 against Intel's 1408, a 164.5% advantage. This is not a marginal gap; it indicates a fundamental difference in how these two processors handle single-threaded workloads in the PassMark suite.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 3 210 uses Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, packaged as Hawk Point. It integrates 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 211TE uses Bartlett Lake silicon on Intel's 10 nm process, with a 215 mm² die size (transistor count not recorded in the database).

Core counts diverge sharply: the Ryzen 3 210 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 5 211TE packs 10 cores and 16 threads. This explains the Intel advantage in multi-core rendering despite the AMD part's higher clock speeds. The Ryzen 3 210 boosts to 4.70 GHz from a 3.00 GHz base clock, while the Intel part boosts to 4.80 GHz from a 1.70 GHz base.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD part provides 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 8 MB shared L3. The Intel part offers 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with 20 MB shared L3. The larger Intel L3 cache likely contributes to its rendering performance.

Memory support separates them: the Ryzen 3 210 supports DDR5 only with dual-channel access and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, but its maximum recorded bandwidth is lower at 76.8 GB/s. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not.

Platform differences are significant. The Ryzen 3 210 uses AMD Socket FP7 and is classified as a mobile processor, while the Intel Core 5 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700 and is a desktop part. PCIe support also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes, Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 740M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 730.

Power envelopes reflect their market segments. The Ryzen 3 210 carries a 28 W TDP, while the Intel Core 5 211TE is rated at 45 W. This 17 W difference in thermal design power aligns with the mobile versus desktop positioning.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a uniform pattern. Across R15, R20, and R23, the Intel Core 5 211TE beats the Ryzen 3 210 by 8.2% in every multi-core test: R15 multicore 1229 vs 1128, R20 multicore 5124 vs 4703, R23 multicore 12201 vs 11198. The single-core Cinebench results are nearly identical in margin: R15 single-core 173 vs 159 (8.1% Intel lead), R20 single-core 723 vs 664 (8.2%), R23 single-core 1722 vs 1581 (8.2%). This consistency across different Cinebench versions suggests the Intel part has a stable performance advantage in this rendering suite, likely from its higher core count and larger L3 cache.

PassMark results tell a different story. The AMD Ryzen 3 210 wins the data-oriented tests with substantial margins. Data compression: 152017 vs 133434 (13.9% AMD lead). Data encryption: 8607 vs 7231 (19% AMD lead). Extended instructions: 11464 vs 8615 (33.1% AMD lead). Random string sorting: 19454 vs 14838 (31.1% AMD lead). Integer math: 37933 vs 33991 (11.6% AMD lead). Multithread: 13585 vs 11685 (16.3% AMD lead).

The Intel part counters in specific compute tasks. Physics simulation: 1278 vs 821 (35.8% Intel lead). Find prime numbers: 72 vs 49 (31.9% Intel lead). Floating point math: 26150 vs 23649 (9.6% Intel lead).

The single-thread anomaly dominates the comparison. PassMark single-thread shows 3724 for AMD vs 1408 for Intel, a 164.5% difference. This is the largest margin in the entire head-to-head set and appears in both single-thread and singlethread entries, confirming it is not a data error.

The Verdict

The data points to distinct purchasing decisions based on workload. For rendering, video encoding, or any Cinebench-class workload, the Intel Core 5 211TE is the stronger choice. Its 8.2% multi-core advantage across all three Cinebench versions, combined with a 35.8% lead in physics simulation, makes it the better processor for content creation tasks that rely on CPU rendering.

For data manipulation, encryption, or compression-heavy tasks, the AMD Ryzen 3 210 delivers superior results. Its 33.1% lead in extended instructions and 31.1% lead in random string sorting indicate strong performance in data processing pipelines. The 19% encryption advantage and 13.9% compression lead make it suitable for database, archival, or security-related workloads.

The single-thread performance gap is the deciding factor for interactive or lightly threaded applications. The Ryzen 3 210's 164.5% PassMark single-thread advantage is overwhelming. This suggests that for general desktop responsiveness, single-threaded application performance, or legacy software that does not scale across cores, the AMD part is clearly superior.

The Intel part also carries a 10-core, 16-thread configuration versus the AMD part's 4 cores and 8 threads, which explains its multi-core wins despite the AMD part's higher clock speeds. The Intel L3 cache is 20 MB versus 8 MB on the AMD side, another factor in its rendering performance.

The Ryzen 3 210's 28 W TDP versus Intel's 45 W TDP means the AMD part achieves its data-processing wins at lower power. This matters for mobile deployments, since the AMD part is the mobile processor in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE scores 12201 versus the AMD Ryzen 3 210's 11198, an 8.2% Intel advantage.

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance according to PassMark?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 scores 3724 versus Intel's 1408, a 164.5% advantage for AMD.

Q: How do the core counts differ between these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE supports ECC memory; the AMD Ryzen 3 210 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 has 89.6 GB/s bandwidth with DDR5 support. The Intel Core 5 211TE has 76.8 GB/s bandwidth with both DDR4 and DDR5 support.

Q: Which processor wins in data encryption benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 210 scores 8607 versus Intel's 7231, a 19% AMD advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 210 | Intel Core 5 211TE |

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

| Cores | 4 | 10 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 1.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Bartlett Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 137 mm² | 215 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 14 Lanes | Gen 5, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 740M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $221 |