Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211E dominates the head-to-head record with 15 wins against 2 for the Intel Core 3 305. The database shows a clear split: the Core 5 211E wins every Cinebench test, every PassMark throughput test, and the single-threaded PassMark test, while the Core 3 305 takes only the PassMark prime-number search and physics simulations.

The Core 5 211E is the obvious choice for rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 20,389 against 13,123 for the Core 3 305, a 35.6% advantage. The single-core gap is nearly identical at 35.6% in Cinebench R23, with scores of 2,878 versus 1,852. This consistency across every Cinebench iteration, R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core, indicates that the Core 5 211E holds a structural advantage, not a workload-specific one.

For data-heavy tasks, the Core 5 211E extends its lead further. PassMark data compression shows 346,757 against 146,857, a 57.6% margin. Integer math is the largest gap at 63.3%, with scores of 88,117 versus 32,295. Floating-point math also favors the Core 5 211E at 66,402 versus 42,284, a 36.3% difference. Random string sorting goes to the Core 5 211E by 48.6%, and extended instructions by 37.3%.

The Core 3 305 wins two narrowly defined tests. PassMark find prime numbers shows 115 versus 43, a 167.4% advantage. PassMark physics shows 1,233 versus 702, a 75.6% margin. These are the only two tests where the Core 3 305 leads, and both are strongly single-threaded integer or physics-simulation workloads.

The near-tie appears in PassMark single-thread: 4,006 for the Core 5 211E versus 3,977 for the Core 3 305, a 0.7% difference. This is the only benchmark where the two processors are effectively matched. Every other comparison shows a double-digit gap. The average benchmark score reflects the overall separation: 37,829 for the Core 5 211E versus 18,302 for the Core 3 305.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel nodes and design generations. The Core 3 305 uses Wildcat Lake on a 3 nm process, while the Core 5 211E uses Bartlett Lake on a 10 nm process. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the process gap is substantial.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating that 6 of its cores support two threads each. This explains the multi-core benchmark separation: the Core 5 211E has both more cores and more threads.

Clock speeds favor the Core 5 211E. Its base clock is 2.70 GHz against 1.50 GHz for the Core 3 305, and its boost clock is 4.90 GHz against 4.30 GHz. The Core 3 305 compensates with a smaller thermal envelope, 15 W versus 65 W, and a mobile socket, Intel BGA 1516, instead of the desktop Intel Socket 1700 used by the Core 5 211E.

Cache hierarchies are organized differently. The Core 3 305 lists L1 at 192 KB total, L2 at 2.5 MB total, and L3 at 6 MB shared. The Core 5 211E lists L1 at 80 KB per core, L2 at 2 MB per core, and L3 at 20 MB shared. The Core 5 211E has far more L3 cache and its per-core L2 allocation is larger on a per-core basis. The Core 5 211E also has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while the Core 3 305 has no die size recorded.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 211E also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 305 does not.

PCIe connectivity favors the Core 5 211E with Gen 5 and 16 CPU lanes, whereas the Core 3 305 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ: the Core 3 305 carries Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe core, while the Core 5 211E carries UHD Graphics 730. The Core 3 305 is a mobile part; the Core 5 211E is a desktop part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core 5 211E scores 20,389 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core 3 305 scores 13,123. That is a 35.6% advantage for the Core 5 211E.

Q: Does the Core 3 305 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes. It wins PassMark find prime numbers with 115 versus 43, a 167.4% margin, and PassMark physics with 1,233 versus 702, a 75.6% margin.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus. The Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Core 3 305 uses a 3 nm process. The Core 5 211E uses a 10 nm process.

Q: Do the two processors have similar single-thread performance?

A: The PassMark single-thread scores are nearly identical: 4,006 for the Core 5 211E and 3,977 for the Core 3 305, a 0.7% difference. In Cinebench R23 single-core, however, the Core 5 211E leads by 35.6%.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 305 | Intel Core 5 211E |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 6 | 16 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Bartlett Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Die size | Not recorded | 257 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB total | 80 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB total | 2 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 20 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | $221 |

The Core 5 211E has a higher launch MSRP absent from this list, but the recorded launch MSRP values show $309 for the Core 3 305 and $221 for the Core 5 211E.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Core 5 211E comes in PassMark integer math, where its 88,117 beats 32,295 by 63.3%. Data compression is next at 57.6% (346,757 versus 146,857), followed by random string sorting at 48.6% (34,308 versus 17,623). These three tests show that the Core 5 211E is particularly strong on integer-heavy throughput, which aligns with its extra cores and threads.

Cinebench results are consistent across all three versions. The multi-core deltas are 35.7% in R15, 35.6% in R20, and 35.6% in R23. Single-core deltas sit at 35.6%, 35.7%, and 35.6% respectively. The uniformity of these margins suggests a fixed per-clock or per-core advantage rather than a scaling effect. The Core 5 211E also wins PassMark floating-point math by 36.3% (66,402 versus 42,284), extended instructions by 37.3% (21,592 versus 13,543), and data encryption by 38.6% (17,938 versus 11,019).

PassMark multithread shows a 35.2% advantage for the Core 5 211E (23,833 versus 15,439), which is slightly smaller than the Cinebench multi-core margins. PassMark single-thread is the closest contest at 0.7%, with 4,006 versus 3,977.

The Core 3 305 wins PassMark find prime numbers by 167.4% (115 versus 43) and PassMark physics by 75.6% (1,233 versus 702). These results are notable because the Core 3 305 has a lower boost clock, 4.30 GHz versus 4.90 GHz, and fewer cores. The prime-number test and physics simulation may respond differently to the Core 3 305's architecture, likely the Wildcat Lake core design on the 3 nm node, but the recorded data does not specify the exact cause.

The average benchmark scores place the Core 5 211E at 37,829, which sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 305 averages 18,302, in the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals in the database confirm the separation: the Core 5 211E is within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E, while the Core 3 305 is within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E and 0.1% of the Intel Core i3-14100.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the Intel Core 5 211E is the stronger processor for almost every measured workload. It wins all Cinebench tests, all PassMark throughput tests, and the PassMark single-thread test. Its 10 cores and 16 threads, higher clocks, dual-channel memory, and larger L3 cache give it a commanding lead in multi-threaded rendering, compression, encryption, and integer math. The 35.6% Cinebench R23 multi-core margin and the 63.3% integer-math margin are decisive.

The Intel Core 3 305 is not without merit. Its 15 W TDP, 3 nm process, and mobile socket make it a low-power part, and it wins the two tests where its architecture is strongest: prime-number search by 167.4% and physics by 75.6%. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3,977 is nearly identical to the Core 5 211E's 4,006, showing that in light single-threaded tasks the two are comparable.

For desktop users needing maximum throughput across rendering, data processing, and general compute, the Core 5 211E is the clear choice. For mobile or low-power designs where the 15 W envelope and BGA 1516 socket matter, the Core 3 305 fits a different purpose. The benchmark record does not support selecting the Core 3 305 for performance, only for its power profile and form factor. The Core 5 211E also carries the higher launch MSRP at $309 versus $221 for the Core 3 305, but the performance gap is far larger than the price gap would suggest.