Intel Core 5 130UL vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

The Intel Core 5 130UL and Intel Core 5 211E are both 10-core desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, but they are built on different architectures and target different segments of the performance spectrum. The 130UL is a Raptor Lake-PS part with a 15-watt TDP, while the 211E is a Bartlett Lake part with a 65-watt TDP. The recorded data shows a substantial performance gap between them, with the 211E delivering significantly higher benchmark scores across all tested workloads.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 211E is the stronger processor in every measured benchmark category. Its average benchmark score is 37,829, which places it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The 130UL has a percentile rank of 50, and no benchmark scores are recorded for it in the database. This means the 211E is the clear choice for any workload that depends on raw compute performance.

The 211E also holds its own against a tight group of rivals. Its average score of 37,829 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, which scores 37,804, a difference of only 0.1 percent. It is also 0.2 percent ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 (37,762) and 0.2 percent behind both the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (37,904) and the Intel Core i9-14901E (37,911). These deltas are small enough that the 211E is effectively in the same performance class as those four processors.

The 130UL, by contrast, has no nearest rivals listed and no recorded scores. Its 15-watt TDP and lower clock speeds suggest it is designed for efficiency-constrained systems, not for maximum throughput. The data indicates that anyone choosing between these two parts should select the 211E unless the system requires the lower power envelope of the 130UL. The 211E also supports ECC memory, which the 130UL does not, making it the better fit for reliability-focused applications.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E boosts to 4.90 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 130UL boosts to 4.70 GHz. The 211E also has a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz compared to 1.60 GHz for the 130UL.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The 211E, however, has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is listed for the 130UL.

Q: Does the 211E support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 5 211E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 130UL does not, which makes the 211E the only one of the two suitable for systems that require error-correcting memory.

Q: What is the difference in thread count?

A: The 211E supports 16 threads, while the 130UL supports 12 threads. Both have 10 cores, so the difference comes from how many cores can process additional threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 12 MB on the 130UL. The 211E also has a larger L2 cache at 2 MB per core versus 1.25 MB per core for the 130UL.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the 211E?

A: The launch MSRP of the Intel Core 5 211E is $221. No launch MSRP is recorded for the 130UL.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The 130UL is based on Raptor Lake, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, and belongs to the Core 5 generation under that architecture. The 211E is based on Bartlett Lake and belongs to the Core 5 generation under that architecture. Both are manufactured on a 10 nm process node at Intel, but the die size differs. The 211E has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while no die size is listed for the 130UL.

The cache hierarchy shows clear architectural divergence. Both parts have an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, but the L2 cache scales from 1.25 MB per core on the 130UL to 2 MB per core on the 211E. The shared L3 cache is 12 MB on the 130UL and 20 MB on the 211E. These differences directly contribute to the performance gap seen in the benchmark data.

The integrated graphics also differ. The 130UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the 211E uses UHD Graphics 730. The 211E supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the 130UL. The PCIe interface is another major split: the 130UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), whereas the 211E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This gives the 211E both more lanes and a newer generation of PCIe connectivity.

The 211E has a part number recorded as SRQERQ65F, while the 130UL lists its part number as unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The 211E was released on 2025-01-12, and the 130UL was released on 2024-04-07. Both are listed as Active in production status and target the Desktop market segment.

Specification Differences

The most immediately visible difference is power. The 130UL has a TDP of 15 watts, while the 211E has a TDP of 65 watts. Clock speeds follow the same pattern: the 130UL runs at 1.60 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost, while the 211E runs at 2.70 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost. The 211E is higher in every clock metric.

Thread count differs as well. Both have 10 cores, but the 211E supports 16 threads versus 12 threads on the 130UL. The cache specifications line up with this pattern, with the 211E holding the advantage in both L2 and L3 capacity. The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core.

Memory support is the same in type and channel configuration, but the 211E has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, a figure not listed for the 130UL. ECC memory support is exclusive to the 211E. The PCIe configuration is also exclusive: Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the 211E versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the 130UL.

The integrated graphics differ, with the 130UL featuring Iris Xe Graphics 80EU and the 211E featuring UHD Graphics 730. The die size of 257 mm² is recorded for the 211E only. The production status is Active for both, and both use the Intel Socket 1700. The 211E has a launch MSRP of $221; no price is recorded for the 130UL.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 211E has a full set of benchmark scores, while the Intel Core 5 130UL has none recorded. This makes a direct side-by-side comparison impossible from the database, but the available data for the 211E can be examined in detail against its nearest rivals.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 211E scores 20,389. Its single-core score in the same test is 2,878. These results place it in the upper percentile range for desktop processors. The Cinebench R20 results are 8,563 multi-core and 1,208 single-core. The Cinebench R15 results are 2,055 multi-core and 289 single-core. Each successive Cinebench version shows the same pattern: strong multi-core throughput paired with competitive single-core performance.

PassMark results for the 211E are extensive. The multi-thread score is 23,833, and the single-thread score is 4,006. Integer math scores 88,117, while floating-point math scores 66,402. Data compression scores 346,757, and data encryption scores 17,938. Extended instructions score 21,592, and random string sorting scores 34,308. Physics tests score 702, and prime number finding scores 43.

The nearest rivals for the 211E all sit within a narrow band around its average score. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 is 0.1 percent behind, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is 0.2 percent behind, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and Intel Core i9-14901E are each 0.2 percent ahead. These are near-identical performance levels, meaning the 211E does not dominate its class but is fully competitive with it.

The absence of any benchmark data for the 130UL means the database cannot quantify how far behind it actually is. What can be stated is that the 211E delivers a 50-point advantage in percentile ranking (86 versus 50) and carries a 65-watt TDP that is more than four times the 130UL's 15-watt envelope. The clock speed advantage of 200 MHz at boost and 1.10 GHz at base, combined with the larger caches, points to the 211E as the performance leader. The 130UL, with its lower power draw and older architecture, remains the only choice for systems that must operate within a 15-watt thermal budget.