CPU Comparison

The Intel Atom x7211RE and Intel Core i5-11300H are both active mobile processors, yet they occupy opposite ends of Intel’s performance spectrum. The data shows that the Core i5-11300H dominates every shared benchmark, with the Atom x7211RE trailing by roughly 80% in each test. However, the Atom’s existence is not about raw speed but about efficiency and cost, as its 6-watt TDP and $42 launch MSRP suggest a fundamentally different design goal. The benchmark results confirm a wide chasm, but the specification sheets reveal two distinct philosophies for mobile computing.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unilaterally decisive. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core i5-11300H scores 919 versus the Atom’s 181, a delta of -80.3% for the Atom. That pattern holds across every rendering test: Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 3833 for the i5 against 757 for the Atom (-80.3%), and Cinebench R23 multi-core repeats the margin at 9127 versus 1804 (-80.2%). The single-core results are equally lopsided. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-11300H scores 540, while the Atom manages only 106, a -80.4% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1288 versus 254, again a -80.3% deficit for the Atom.

The consistency of the ~80% delta across all five shared tests is striking. It suggests that the performance gap is not workload-specific but systemic, rooted in fundamental architectural and specification differences. The Atom x7211RE has 2 cores and 2 threads, while the i5-11300H has 4 cores and 8 threads. That doubling of cores and quadrupling of threads explains much of the multi-threaded gap, but the single-core deficit is more telling. The i5’s 4.40 GHz boost clock versus the Atom’s 3.20 GHz boost clock, combined with a modern Tiger Lake core design versus the Atom’s Gracemont efficiency cores, yields a massive per-thread advantage.

The data shows zero wins for the Atom x7211RE in the head-to-head suite. The Core i5-11300H wins all five tests. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: the Atom averages 2811 across all its tests, while the i5 averages 2792. That near-identical average is misleading because the Atom’s benchmark set includes many PassMark sub-tests where low absolute scores are typical. The head-to-head Cinebench results are the cleanest comparison, and they are unambiguous. The i5-11300H is roughly five times faster in multi-core rendering and about five times faster in single-core rendering, based on the raw score ratios.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i5-11300H in multi-core rendering?

A: The i5-11300H scores 9127 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 1804 for the Atom x7211RE, a delta of -80.2% for the Atom. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the margin is identical at -80.3%, with scores of 3833 and 757.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap as large as the multi-core gap?

A: Yes, the single-core deficit is nearly identical. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Atom scores 254 versus 1288 for the i5-11300H, a -80.3% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 106 versus 540, a -80.4% difference.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-11300H boosts to 4.40 GHz, while the Intel Atom x7211RE boosts to 3.20 GHz. The i5 also has a higher base clock at 2.60 GHz versus 1.00 GHz for the Atom.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The Atom x7211RE has a TDP of 6 watts, while the Core i5-11300H has a TDP of 28 watts. This represents a 22-watt difference, which translates to significantly different thermal and power requirements.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Atom x7211RE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core i5-11300H supports only DDR4. Additionally, the i5 uses dual-channel memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Atom uses single-channel with 38.4 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core i5-11300H has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Atom x7211RE has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5 also has a larger L2 cache configuration at 1.25 MB per core versus 2 MB shared for the Atom.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows that the Intel Core i5-11300H wins every single head-to-head test, making it the clear choice for any performance-sensitive workload. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show the i5 at roughly five times the Atom’s score. This makes the i5-11300H suitable for rendering, video encoding, or any multi-threaded application where the 4-core/8-thread configuration can stretch its legs. The single-core victories, with a -80.3% delta in Cinebench R23, also position the i5 as the better option for lightly-threaded tasks like web browsing, office productivity, or legacy software.

The Atom x7211RE has no benchmark wins to point to, but its 6-watt TDP and 2-core/2-thread design suggest a different use case. The data does not measure power consumption directly, but the TDP figures in the fact pack imply the Atom is designed for fanless or passively cooled systems where low heat generation is paramount. Its 1.00 GHz base clock and 3.20 GHz boost clock are modest, but adequate for basic embedded tasks, IoT gateways, or thin clients. The Atom’s support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives it flexibility in system design, even if the single-channel 38.4 GB/s bandwidth limits memory-intensive workloads.

In terms of market positioning, the Atom’s 51st percentile versus all CPUs matches the i5’s 51st percentile, which is a statistical oddity given the head-to-head results. This is likely because the Atom’s benchmark set includes PassMark sub-tests where its scores, while low, are not as catastrophic relative to the broader CPU landscape. The i5’s nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E5-4627 v3, which it beats by 0.1%, while the Atom’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-8600K, which it trails by 0.2%. These rivalries show that both chips sit in a similar overall performance tier, but the head-to-head data reveals the i5 is far stronger in the specific tests where both were measured.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Atom x7211RE has 2 cores and 2 threads, while the Core i5-11300H has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 1.00 GHz for the Atom and 2.60 GHz for the i5, with boost clocks of 3.20 GHz and 4.40 GHz respectively. The TDP difference is substantial: 6 watts for the Atom versus 28 watts for the i5. The Atom uses an Intel BGA 1264 socket, while the i5 uses Intel BGA 1449. The Atom’s cache layout is 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3, whereas the i5 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.

Memory support diverges as well. The Atom supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a single-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the i5 supports only DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe connectivity differs: the Atom offers Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the i5 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are also different, with the Atom featuring UHD Graphics 16EU and the i5 featuring Iris XE 80EU. The die size is listed for the i5 at 146.1 mm², but no die size is given for the Atom. The i5 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the Atom is listed at $42.

The release dates are separated by over three years, with the Atom launching in April 2024 and the i5 in January 2021. Both are marked as Active production status. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are distinct (SRNET for the Atom, SRKH6 for the i5). The i5 has a larger L3 cache by 2 MB, but the Atom’s L2 cache is shared across both cores, whereas the i5’s L2 is per-core.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The Atom x7211RE uses the Amston Lake architecture with the Gracemont core generation, which is designed for efficiency. The Core i5-11300H uses the Tiger Lake architecture with the Tiger Lake-H core generation, designed for performance. Both are built on a 10 nm process node at Intel’s foundry, but the core designs are radically different. Gracemont is Intel’s efficiency core, optimized for low power consumption and modest performance, while Tiger Lake-H is a high-performance core with a much wider execution pipeline.

The cache hierarchy reflects these design philosophies. The Atom has 96 KB L1 per core, which is larger than the i5’s 80 KB L1 per core, but the i5 compensates with a 1.25 MB L2 per core versus the Atom’s shared 2 MB L2. The i5’s 8 MB L3 is larger than the Atom’s 6 MB L3. The i5’s integrated graphics are far more capable, with 80 execution units versus 16 for the Atom. The i5’s dual-channel memory controller and higher bandwidth (51.2 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s) are also significant architectural advantages.

The PCIe implementation differs as well, with the i5 supporting Gen 4 and 20 lanes versus the Atom’s Gen 3 and 9 lanes. This affects potential expansion and I/O throughput. The i5’s Tiger Lake architecture also supports a higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz, which is critical for single-threaded performance. The Atom’s Gracemont cores are designed for a different purpose, prioritizing energy efficiency over raw throughput. The 6-watt TDP is the clearest indicator of that intent, allowing for compact, fanless designs that the 28-watt i5 cannot accommodate.

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal: the Intel Core i5-11300H is the superior performer in every measurable benchmark shared between the two. For users who need rendering speed, multi-threaded productivity, or high single-core responsiveness, the i5-11300H delivers roughly 80% more performance in Cinebench tests. Its 4-core/8-thread configuration, 4.40 GHz boost clock, and dual-channel 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suitable for demanding mobile workloads like video editing, 3D modeling, or software compilation. The i5’s Iris XE 80EU graphics also provide a significant advantage for light gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks, though the fact pack does not include graphics benchmarks.

The Intel Atom x7211RE is not a competitor to the i5 in performance terms. Its 2-core/2-thread design and 6-watt TDP position it for embedded systems, low-power servers, or industrial applications where energy efficiency is paramount. The Atom’s support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory is a unique feature that could extend its relevance in future system designs. Its $42 launch MSRP, while not a value judgment, indicates a fundamentally different market tier than the i5’s $309. The data shows the Atom holds its own in average benchmark score against the i5 due to its broader test set, but in direct comparison, it loses all five head-to-head tests by an identical ~80% margin.

The choice is clear from the benchmarks: pick the Core i5-11300H for performance, pick the Atom x7211RE only if the 6-watt TDP and dual-memory support are non-negotiable requirements. The i5’s 28-watt TDP and larger die size are the trade-offs for its dominant scores. The Atom’s single-channel memory and 9 PCIe lanes limit its expandability, but its efficiency core design makes it a viable option for fanless, battery-powered devices. The data does not support any use case where the Atom outperforms the i5, but it does support a use case where the Atom’s low power draw is the primary selection criterion.