Intel Core 3 100UL vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 211E is the clear performance leader in this comparison. The recorded data shows the Core 5 211E holds a 100% win rate in head-to-head benchmark coverage, while the Core 3 100UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, placing it well above the Core 3 100UL's 50th percentile ranking. The Core 5 211E also carries a launch MSRP of $221.

The Core 3 100UL is a lower-power, lower-core-count desktop processor. Its 6 cores and 8 threads target lighter workloads, while its 15 W TDP suggests a thermally restrained platform. With no benchmark results recorded, the database cannot substantiate its real-world performance. The Core 5 211E, by contrast, delivers 10 cores and 16 threads at a 65 W TDP, and its Cinebench and Passmark results confirm strong multi-threaded and single-threaded capability.

For users selecting between these two, the data points decisively to the Core 5 211E for any performance-sensitive task. The Core 3 100UL may suit basic desktop use, but no recorded measurements support a performance claim. The Core 5 211E offers roughly double the core count, double the L3 cache, higher clocks, and a 36-percentile advantage in the global CPU ranking.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the Intel Socket 1700 platform and a 10 nm process node from Intel's foundry. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus. The architectural split appears in their codenames and generations. The Core 3 100UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename. The Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, with its generation listed as Core 5 (Bartlett Lake).

The Core 3 100UL integrates UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Core 5 211E ships with UHD Graphics 730. The Core 5 211E enables ECC memory support, a feature absent on the Core 3 100UL. PCIe connectivity differs substantially: the Core 3 100UL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Core 5 211E provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core 5 211E also lists a die size of 257 mm² and a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s; the Core 3 100UL has no recorded die size or memory bandwidth figure.

Cache hierarchies diverge in capacity. Both use 80 KB of L1 per core, but the L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB on the Core 3 100UL versus 2 MB on the Core 5 211E. The shared L3 cache doubles from 10 MB to 20 MB. Neither processor has a 3D V-Cache option.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Core 3 100UL has a 1.20 GHz base clock and a 4.50 GHz boost clock. The Core 5 211E has a 2.70 GHz base clock and a 4.90 GHz boost clock.

Q: Does the Core 5 211E support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is listed for the Core 5 211E. The Core 3 100UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each chip?

A: The Core 3 100UL has a 15 W TDP. The Core 5 211E has a 65 W TDP.

Q: Which processor has better PCIe connectivity?

A: The Core 5 211E provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core 3 100UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes.

Q: What is the release date for each processor?

A: The Core 3 100UL was released on April 7, 2024. The Core 5 211E was released on January 12, 2025.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core 5 211E doubles the core count from 6 to 10 and the thread count from 8 to 16. Base clock rises from 1.20 GHz to 2.70 GHz, and boost clock rises from 4.50 GHz to 4.90 GHz. TDP increases from 15 W to 65 W.

The cache layout changes: L2 per core moves from 1.25 MB to 2 MB, and L3 shared moves from 10 MB to 20 MB. The L1 cache remains identical at 80 KB per core. The die size is recorded only for the Core 5 211E at 257 mm². Memory bandwidth is recorded only for the Core 5 211E at 76.8 GB/s.

ECC memory is supported only on the Core 5 211E. PCIe generation moves from Gen 4 to Gen 5, and lane count moves from 8 to 16. Integrated graphics change from UHD Graphics 64EU to UHD Graphics 730. The architecture changes from Raptor Lake to Bartlett Lake, and the codename changes from Raptor Lake-PS to Bartlett Lake. The release date moves from April 2024 to January 2025. The Core 5 211E has a recorded launch MSRP of $221 and a part number of SRQERQ65F; the Core 3 100UL has no launch MSRP or part number in the database. Both processors use the Intel Socket 1700, a 10 nm process node, Intel as the foundry, and DDR4/DDR5 dual-channel memory support.

The percentile ranking separates them clearly: the Core 3 100UL sits at the 50th percentile, while the Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core 5 211E is 37829; the Core 3 100UL has an average benchmark score of 0 due to no recorded tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no shared head-to-head benchmark entries between these two processors. However, the Core 5 211E has a full suite of 17 recorded benchmark scores, while the Core 3 100UL has none. The wins tally confirms this: 0 wins for the Core 3 100UL, 0 wins for the Core 5 211E in the head-to-head array, but the Core 5 211E's standalone results provide the only measurable performance data.

In Cinebench R15, the Core 5 211E scores 2055 in multi-core and 289 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 8563 multi-core and 1208 single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 20389 multi-core and 2878 single-core. These results place it comfortably in the 86th percentile of all CPUs.

Passmark results for the Core 5 211E show a wide spread of workload performance. Integer math scores 88117, floating point math scores 66402, and extended instructions score 21592. Data compression scores 346757, while data encryption scores 17938. Random string sorting scores 34308. The find prime numbers test scores 43, and physics scores 702. The multithread score is 23833, and the single-thread score is 4006.

The nearest rivals in the database for the Core 5 211E are all AMD and Intel parts within a narrow band. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scores 37804, a delta of 0.1% below the Core 5 211E's 37829 average. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 37762, a delta of 0.2% below. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 scores 37904, a delta of -0.2% above. The Intel Core i9-14901E scores 37911, a delta of -0.2% above. These margins indicate the Core 5 211E sits in a tight cluster with those four processors, effectively matching them within sub-percent differences.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 211E wins every measurable category in this comparison. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20389 demonstrates strong parallel throughput, suitable for rendering, compilation, and other multi-threaded workloads. Its single-core score of 2878 in the same test indicates solid responsiveness for lightly threaded tasks. The Passmark integer math score of 88117 and floating point math score of 66402 confirm broad compute capability across arithmetic-heavy applications.

The Core 5 211E also wins on platform features. Its PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes provides double the lane count and a newer generation versus the Core 3 100UL's Gen 4 with 8 lanes. ECC memory support makes it viable for reliability-sensitive environments. The 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds what the Core 3 100UL can claim, since no bandwidth figure is recorded for that chip.

The Core 3 100UL wins on power draw. Its 15 W TDP is substantially lower than the 65 W TDP of the Core 5 211E, indicating a cooler-running, lower-energy desktop option. The release date of April 2024 also makes it earlier to market. No benchmark data exists to support a performance win for the Core 3 100UL in any workload.

For users prioritizing raw performance, the Core 5 211E is the only defensible choice from the recorded data. For users prioritizing minimal power consumption and thermal output, the Core 3 100UL offers a lower TDP, but any performance advantage cannot be verified. The Core 5 211E's 86th percentile ranking versus the Core 3 100UL's 50th percentile ranking summarizes the performance gap: a 36-percentile advantage for the Core 5 211E.