Intel Atom x7211RE vs Intel Core i7-11370H Comparison

The Intel Core i7-11370H and Intel Atom x7211RE occupy opposite ends of the mobile processor spectrum. One is a 28-watt, quad-core Tiger Lake-H part aimed at performance laptops; the other is a 6-watt, dual-core Amston Lake chip built for efficiency-first embedded systems. The benchmark data confirms this split: the i7 wins every single shared test, often by margins exceeding 440%. However, the Atom’s low power envelope and different architectural focus mean it is not a failed product, but a specialized tool for a different job.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-11370H wins in every scenario where raw compute throughput matters. This includes multi-threaded rendering, single-threaded responsiveness, and any workload that scales with cache and memory bandwidth. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7 scores 9793 versus the Atom’s 1804, a 442.8% advantage. Single-thread performance tells the same story: 1382 versus 254 in R23 single-core, a 444.1% lead. If the task is compiling code, editing video, or running a demanding virtual machine, the i7 is the only viable choice between these two.

The Intel Atom x7211RE does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its wins are contextual, not score-based. The data shows it has a 6-watt TDP, which is less than a quarter of the i7’s 28-watt TDP. This makes it the right pick for fanless designs, battery-powered IoT gateways, or industrial controllers where heat dissipation and power draw are the primary constraints. The Atom also supports DDR5 memory, which the i7 does not, and its 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are sufficient for simple peripherals. In short, the Atom wins on integration efficiency, not on performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is wide. The i7-11370H uses Tiger Lake-H, built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 146.1 mm². It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 12 MB L3. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4, delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The integrated graphics are Iris XE with 96 execution units, and the part connects via PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes.

The Atom x7211RE uses Amston Lake, also on a 10 nm process, but with a completely different core design. It has 2 cores and 2 threads, with a base clock of 1.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. Its cache is smaller: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support is single-channel DDR4 or DDR5, with a peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics with just 16 execution units, and the PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The i7’s 12 MB L3 is double the Atom’s 6 MB, and the i7’s memory bandwidth is 33% higher.

The core count difference is significant. The i7 has twice the cores and four times the threads of the Atom. This explains the massive multi-threaded deltas. The i7’s boost clock is 50% higher than the Atom’s, which drives the single-thread advantages. The i7 also has a much larger L3 cache, which helps with data-heavy workloads. The Atom’s L2 is shared across both cores, while the i7 has dedicated L2 per core. These are fundamental design choices: Tiger Lake-H is a performance architecture, while Amston Lake is an efficiency architecture using Gracemont cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unidirectional. The i7 wins all five shared tests, with deltas ranging from 442.8% to 447.2%. The largest margin is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i7 scores 580 against the Atom’s 106, a 447.2% difference. This is the single biggest percentage gap in the comparison. The smallest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, at 442.8%, still a dominant margin.

Cinebench R15 multi-core shows the i7 at 987 versus the Atom’s 181, a 445.3% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core has the i7 at 4113 versus 757, a 443.3% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core is 1382 versus 254, a 444.1% difference. The consistent pattern across all tests is that the i7 is roughly 4.4 to 4.5 times faster than the Atom. This is not a close contest; it is a different performance class.

The i7’s absolute scores also place it in a specific competitive bracket. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5475U (avg score 2865, delta -0.1%), the Intel Xeon E-2126G (2842, +0.7%), and the Intel Core i7-6800K (2838, +0.8%). The Atom’s nearest rivals are entirely different processors, like the Intel Core i5-8600K (2807, +0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U (2829, -0.6%). Despite the massive performance gap between the two CPUs in this comparison, both have similar average benchmark scores (2861 for the i7, 2811 for the Atom) because their benchmark suites are different — the i7 runs Cinebench and 3DMark, while the Atom runs Passmark tests.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-11370H is the superior processor for any compute-intensive task. If you need to run multi-threaded rendering, compile large codebases, or handle demanding single-threaded applications, the i7 is the only choice. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock, 12 MB L3 cache, and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a level of performance the Atom cannot approach. The i7’s 96 EU Iris XE graphics also make it suitable for light gaming or GPU-accelerated workloads without a discrete card.

The Intel Atom x7211RE is for a different buyer. Its 6-watt TDP and support for DDR5 make it ideal for embedded systems, thin clients, or fanless industrial PCs. The data shows it is not a competitor to the i7 in any benchmark, but its low power consumption and modern memory support are valuable in specific niches. The i7’s launch MSRP is $426, while the Atom’s is $42, but this comparison is not about price parity — it is about matching the silicon to the workload.

For a laptop user, the i7 is the obvious pick. For an embedded developer, the Atom’s efficiency wins. There is no crossover. The i7 is a performance part; the Atom is an efficiency part. Both are active products, but they serve entirely separate markets.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-11370H is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 9793 versus the Atom’s 1804, a 442.8% advantage. The same pattern appears in R20 (4113 vs 757) and R15 (987 vs 181).

Q: Does the Atom have any performance advantage at all?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark data, the Atom wins zero tests. The i7 wins all five shared benchmarks, with deltas ranging from 442.8% to 447.2%.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Atom has a 6-watt TDP, while the i7 has a 28-watt TDP. This makes the Atom suitable for low-power and embedded designs, while the i7 requires more substantial cooling.

Q: Which CPU supports faster memory?

A: The Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the i7 only supports DDR4. However, the i7 uses dual-channel memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Atom is single-channel with 38.4 GB/s.

Q: How do their single-thread scores compare?

A: The i7 wins by a wide margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1382 versus the Atom’s 254, a 444.1% difference. In R20 single-core, the i7 scores 580 versus the Atom’s 106, a 447.2% gap.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance class?

A: No. The i7’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5475U and Intel Xeon E-2126G, while the Atom’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-8600K and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U. Despite similar average benchmark scores, the i7 runs different, more demanding tests.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-11370H | Intel Atom x7211RE |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 2 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 1.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 6 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1449 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Architecture | Tiger Lake | Amston Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 10 nm |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (shared) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 3, 9 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris XE 96EU | UHD Graphics 16EU |

| Launch MSRP | $426 | $42 |

| Release Date | 2021-01-10 | 2024-04-07 |