Intel Core 3 N355 vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data presents a complete sweep: the Intel Core 5 211E wins every single head-to-head comparison in the database, taking all 17 recorded tests. The Intel Core 3 N355 does not register a single victory across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, or any of the PassMark workload tests.

The Core 5 211E dominates in every category, but the margin varies considerably by workload type. The largest advantage appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Core 5 211E scores 20,389 against 5,262 for the Core 3 N355, a delta of -74.2% (from the perspective of the N355). That is the single biggest gap in the entire comparison, indicating that heavily threaded rendering workloads are where the Core 5 211E pulls the furthest ahead.

The smallest gap in the entire dataset is in PassMark physics, where the Core 5 211E scores 702 versus 625 for the Core 3 N355, a delta of just -11%. This suggests that the physics workload, which typically stresses cache behavior and thread scheduling rather than raw core count, is the closest contest. Even so, the Core 5 211E still wins.

Single-threaded performance also favors the Core 5 211E substantially. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the Core 5 211E posts 2,878 against 1,039, a -63.9% delta. PassMark single-thread shows 4,006 versus 2,153, a -46.3% delta. The Core 5 211E has a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and a higher boost clock at 4.90 GHz versus 3.90 GHz, which aligns with the single-thread advantage observed in the data.

Memory-sensitive workloads also show a clear split. PassMark data compression favors the Core 5 211E at 346,757 versus 117,435, a -66.1% delta. Data encryption shows 17,938 versus 8,121, a -54.7% delta. The Core 5 211E uses dual-channel memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core 3 N355 is limited to single-channel memory at 38.4 GB/s, which explains the magnitude of these differences.

Integer and floating-point math workloads follow the same pattern. PassMark integer math: 88,117 versus 33,894, a -61.5% delta. Floating-point math: 66,402 versus 22,695, a -65.8% delta. Extended instructions: 21,592 versus 5,968, a -72.4% delta. The extended instructions gap is the second-largest in the dataset, only behind Cinebench R23 multicore.

The Core 3 N355 does have one structural advantage that the data indirectly reflects: a 15 W TDP compared to the 65 W TDP of the Core 5 211E. For power-constrained environments, the N355 draws less power, but the benchmark scores do not show any workload where that lower power consumption translates into a performance win.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive outcome. The Intel Core 5 211E is the superior processor in every recorded benchmark, with no exceptions. Any workload that benefits from more cores, higher clocks, or faster memory bandwidth will favor the Core 5 211E.

The Core 3 N355 sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13,492. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13,494 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13,452 (0.3% delta), and the Intel Core 5 120UL at 13,594 (-0.8% delta). The N355 is competitive with these older or lower-tier desktop and mobile processors, but it is not in the same class as the Core 5 211E.

The Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 37,829. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 at 37,804 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 at 37,762 (0.2% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37,904 (-0.2% delta). The Core 5 211E is positioned alongside modern Ryzen AI processors, which places it firmly in a higher performance tier.

For a desktop platform with access to standard power delivery, the Core 5 211E is the clear choice from the recorded data. It delivers roughly 2.8 times the average benchmark score of the Core 3 N355 (37,829 versus 13,492). It also offers ECC memory support, dual-channel memory, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and a larger 20 MB shared L3 cache.

For a mobile or low-power embedded scenario where the 15 W TDP of the Core 3 N355 is a hard constraint, the N355 remains a functional option, but the performance trade-off is severe. The N355 uses a single-channel memory bus, has only 8 cores and 8 threads (no hyperthreading), and lacks ECC support. It is a capable low-power part, but the data cannot support any scenario where it outperforms the Core 5 211E.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite provides the clearest picture of the performance gap. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 5 211E scores 20,389 against 5,262 for the Core 3 N355, a -74.2% delta. This is the largest margin in the entire comparison and reflects the combination of 10 cores, 16 threads, and a 20 MB L3 cache on the Core 5 211E, versus 8 cores, 8 threads, and a 6 MB L3 cache on the N355.

Cinebench R20 multicore shows a similar pattern: 8,563 versus 3,612, a -57.8% delta. Cinebench R15 multicore: 2,055 versus 822, a -60% delta. The multicore deltas cluster between -57.8% and -74.2%, with the R23 test being the most demanding and showing the widest spread.

Single-core Cinebench results are also lopsided. R23 singlecore: 2,878 versus 1,039, a -63.9% delta. R20 singlecore: 1,208 versus 509, a -57.9% delta. R15 singlecore: 289 versus 168, a -41.9% delta. The single-core deltas are slightly smaller than multicore deltas, which indicates that the Core 5 211E benefits from both higher clocks and its additional cores.

PassMark extended instructions shows a -72.4% delta (21,592 versus 5,968), which is the second-largest gap. This workload exercises SIMD and specialized instruction paths, and the Core 5 211E's newer Bartlett Lake architecture with 10 cores handles it far more efficiently.

PassMark data compression shows 346,757 versus 117,435, a -66.1% delta. This workload is sensitive to memory bandwidth and cache size, and the Core 5 211E has both advantages: dual-channel 76.8 GB/s memory versus single-channel 38.4 GB/s, and 20 MB L3 versus 6 MB L3.

PassMark floating-point math: 66,402 versus 22,695, a -65.8% delta. Integer math: 88,117 versus 33,894, a -61.5% delta. Both workloads show the Core 5 211E delivering roughly three times the throughput of the N355.

PassMark multithread: 23,833 versus 10,174, a -57.3% delta. Random string sorting: 34,308 versus 14,706, a -57.1% delta. Data encryption: 17,938 versus 8,121, a -54.7% delta.

The closest result is PassMark physics: 702 versus 625, a -11% delta. The physics workload is notoriously dependent on memory latency and scheduler behavior rather than raw core count. The Core 5 211E still wins, but the margin is modest compared to every other test.

PassMark find prime numbers: 43 versus 27, a -37.2% delta. This is the second-closest result, likely because the workload is single-threaded and latency-bound.

PassMark single-thread appears twice in the dataset, once as "single_thread" and once as "singlethread", with identical scores of 4,006 versus 2,153 in both entries, a -46.3% delta each.

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 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 211E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 N355 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E uses a dual-channel memory bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel Core 3 N355 has a boost clock of 3.90 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has an average benchmark score of 37,829 and sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 3 N355 has an average benchmark score of 13,492 and sits at the 68th percentile.

Q: What is the closest benchmark result between the two?

A: The closest result is PassMark physics, where the Core 5 211E scores 702 and the Core 3 N355 scores 625, a delta of -11%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, also listed as Alder Lake-N generation, built on a 10 nm process. The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake architecture, also built on a 10 nm process, but with a larger die size of 257 mm².

Core configuration differs significantly. The N355 offers 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The 211E offers 10 cores and 16 threads, which indicates that some form of hyperthreading is present. The N355 has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The 211E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The N355 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The 211E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation on the 211E is substantially larger, which helps with workloads that reuse working sets.

Memory support differs on multiple fronts. The N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but only on a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The 211E also supports ECC memory, while the N355 does not.

PCIe capabilities are not comparable. The N355 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). The 211E provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This is a major difference for systems that need to attach high-bandwidth peripherals or GPUs.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The N355 uses UHD Graphics 770, while the 211E uses UHD Graphics 730. The N355 is classified as a Mobile segment part, while the 211E is classified as Desktop. The N355 uses Intel BGA 1264 socket, while the 211E uses Intel Socket 1700.

Power and market positioning are also distinct. The N355 has a TDP of 15 W, making it suitable for fanless or low-power mobile designs. The 211E has a TDP of 65 W, which requires active cooling and a desktop-class power delivery system. The 211E has a launch MSRP of $221; the N355 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Release dates are close: the N355 was released on 2025-01-06, and the 211E was released on 2025-01-12. Both are marked as Active in production status. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The N355 has part number SRPNT, and the 211E has part number SRQERQ65F.

The database places the 211E at the 86th percentile of all CPUs and the N355 at the 68th percentile. The 211E's nearest rivals are all AMD Ryzen AI processors plus the Intel Core i9-14901E, with score deltas within 0.2%. The N355's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F, Intel Core i5-9500, Intel Core 5 120UL, and Intel Core i7-1250U, with deltas within 1.1%. The performance tier separation is clear from these rival sets alone.