AMD Ryzen 5 8600G vs Intel Core 5 211TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G wins all 17 shared benchmark comparisons, with no victories for the Intel Core 5 211TE. The margin is not narrow; it is consistently wide across single-threaded, multi-threaded, and specialized workloads.

The largest advantage appears in PassMark single-thread testing. The 8600G scores 3878 against 1408 for the 211TE, a delta of 175.4%. This result indicates a fundamental gap in per-core performance, driven by the AMD processor's higher clock speeds and architecture efficiency. The same test run appears twice in the database (passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread) with identical scores of 3878 and 1408, confirming the result's consistency.

Multi-threaded workloads show a similar pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 8600G records 21503 points versus 12201 for the 211TE, a 76.2% advantage. The Cinebench R20 multi-core result tells the same story: 9031 against 5124, also a 76.2% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2167 versus 1229, a 76.3% lead. These three consecutive Cinebench generations all land near the same percentage, indicating that the performance gap is stable across rendering workloads of varying intensity.

The PassMark integer math test shows a 126.7% delta, with the 8600G scoring 77042 against 33991. Floating-point math follows with an 83.2% lead (47919 versus 26150). Extended instructions, a workload that benefits from modern CPU feature sets, shows the 8600G at 22610 versus 8615, a 162.4% delta. This is the second-largest percentage gap in the entire comparison.

Data-oriented workloads amplify the difference further. PassMark data encryption shows 17181 versus 7231, a 137.6% delta. Data compression shows 293306 versus 133434, a 119.8% lead. Random string sorting shows 35067 versus 14838, a 136.3% advantage. The 8600G also wins PassMark multi-thread by 116.5% (25294 versus 11685) and prime number finding by 33.3% (96 versus 72).

The smallest win for the 8600G is in PassMark physics, where it scores 1450 against 1278, a 13.5% delta. Even this narrowest margin is still a clear victory. The overall average benchmark score reflects the same hierarchy: the 8600G averages 24089, while the 211TE averages 15370. The 8600G sits at the 76th percentile among all CPUs, while the 211TE sits at the 69th percentile. The nearest rivals for the 8600G are the AMD Ryzen 5 7540U (avg score 24188, delta -0.4%), Intel Core i5-13400 (24280, -0.8%), and Intel Core i7-1360P (24344, -1%). The 211TE, by contrast, sits near server-class parts like the AMD EPYC 7543 (15477, -0.7%) and AMD EPYC 7702P (15130, 1.6%), which are much older designs.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G uses TSMC's 4 nm process, while the Intel Core 5 211TE uses Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD chip is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the codename Phoenix, part of the 8000 series. The Intel chip uses the codename Bartlett Lake and is labeled as Core 5 generation. The Intel architecture field is not listed, indicating a less clearly defined architectural lineage in the database.

Core counts differ substantially. The 8600G has 6 cores and 12 threads. The 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. Despite having four more cores and four more threads, the Intel chip loses every multi-threaded benchmark. This indicates that raw core count does not compensate for the per-core performance gap. The 8600G's base clock of 4.30 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz dwarf the 211TE's 1.70 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The much lower base clock on the Intel part likely explains a significant portion of its multi-threaded deficit.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The 8600G has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The 211TE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more cache at every level, yet still loses. This suggests that the AMD architecture extracts more performance per byte of cache, or that the clock speed difference overwhelms the cache advantage.

Memory support differs as well. The 8600G supports only DDR5, while the 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The 8600G has a higher memory bandwidth rating at 83.2 GB/s, compared to 76.8 GB/s for the 211TE. The Intel part supports ECC memory, while the AMD part does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 8600G offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the 211TE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ significantly. The 8600G includes a Radeon 760M, while the 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730. The database does not include direct graphics benchmarks in the head-to-head table, but the Radeon 760M is generally associated with stronger iGPU performance in the recorded specifications.

Power and packaging differ. The 8600G has a 65 W TDP, while the 211TE has a 45 W TDP. The 8600G uses AMD Socket AM5, while the 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700. The 8600G has an unlocked multiplier, while the 211TE is locked. The 8600G has a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors. The 211TE has a die size of 215 mm², with transistor count not listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G wins in every measured category. Single-threaded performance is its strongest area, with a 175.4% lead in PassMark single-thread testing. This makes it the clear choice for workloads that depend on per-core speed, such as lightly threaded applications and interactive tasks.

Multi-threaded rendering workloads also favor the 8600G. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 76.2% lead, and the same margin carries through R20 and R15. The 8600G also leads in PassMark multi-thread by 116.5%, indicating that even heavily threaded workloads benefit from its higher clocks and architecture efficiency.

Encryption and compression workloads strongly favor the 8600G. Data encryption shows a 137.6% lead, and data compression shows a 119.8% lead. These workloads are sensitive to both clock speed and instruction efficiency, and the 8600G delivers in both areas. Extended instructions show a 162.4% lead, confirming that the AMD architecture handles modern instruction sets more effectively.

The Intel Core 5 211TE has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its only relative strength is in PassMark physics, where the delta narrows to 13.5%. Even there, the 8600G wins. The 211TE's advantages lie outside raw performance: it supports ECC memory, offers DDR4 compatibility for older platforms, and carries a lower 45 W TDP. It also uses a larger 215 mm² die, which may indicate a different design priority, but the benchmark data does not translate that into performance wins.

The 211TE's 10 cores and 16 threads do not overcome the 8600G's clock advantage. The 1.70 GHz base clock on the Intel part is a severe handicap in sustained workloads. The 4.80 GHz boost clock helps in short bursts, but the multi-threaded results show that sustained all-core operation falls far behind.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 5 8600G is the superior processor by every measured benchmark. It wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from 13.5% to 175.4%. Its average benchmark score of 24089 places it at the 76th percentile, while the 211TE's 15370 places it at the 69th percentile.

The 8600G is the choice for users who prioritize single-threaded speed, rendering performance, encryption, compression, and general multi-threaded throughput. Its unlocked multiplier also allows overclocking, which is not available on the locked 211TE. The 8600G uses a smaller 178 mm² die on a more advanced 4 nm TSMC process, and it delivers higher memory bandwidth at 83.2 GB/s.

The Intel Core 5 211TE is the choice only for specific platform requirements. It supports ECC memory, which the 8600G does not. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5, which may matter for users with existing DDR4 memory who want to stay on Socket 1700. It also carries a lower 45 W TDP, which may suit power-constrained builds. Its 10 cores and 16 threads provide more parallel hardware, but the benchmark data shows that this does not translate into performance wins.

The 211TE's nearest rivals in the database are server-class AMD EPYC parts, which reflects its positioning as a lower-performance desktop chip. The 8600G's nearest rivals include higher-end desktop and mobile parts, including the Intel Core i5-13400 and Intel Core i7-1360P, and it remains competitive with them within 1%. The 8600G also carries a launch MSRP of $229, while the 211TE carries a launch MSRP of $221.

For users who need ECC memory support or DDR4 compatibility, the 211TE is the only option between these two. For everyone else, the 8600G is the faster, more capable processor. The 175.4% single-thread lead alone is enough to establish the hierarchy, and the multi-threaded results confirm it.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G wins all 17 shared head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core 5 211TE wins none.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark single-thread testing, where the 8600G scores 3878 against 1408, a 175.4% delta.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 211TE have more cores?

A: Yes, the 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the 8600G has 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite this, the 8600G wins all multi-threaded benchmarks.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 211TE supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8600G does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The 8600G supports DDR5 only. The 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What are the integrated graphics on each processor?

A: The 8600G includes a Radeon 760M, while the 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The 8600G has a 65 W TDP, while the 211TE has a 45 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Component | AMD Ryzen 5 8600G | Intel Core 5 211TE |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 4.30 GHz | 1.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 178 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 | 16 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 760M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2024-01-07 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $229 | $221 |