Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear overall winner in raw performance: the Intel Core 5 211E takes 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the 211E scores 20,389 against the 210H's 11,830, a 42% deficit for the mobile chip. That is the largest single delta in the entire dataset, and it signals a fundamental difference in sustained multi-threaded capability. The single-core R23 result tells a similar story, with the 211E at 2,878 versus 1,771, a 38.5% advantage. These Cinebench deltas are not marginal; they indicate the 211E delivers substantially more compute throughput in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads.

The PassMark suite reinforces the pattern. In integer math, the 211E posts 88,117 versus 61,503, a 30.2% lead. Floating point math shows 66,402 against 45,057, a 32.1% gap. Data compression favors the 211E by 37.2%, with scores of 346,757 and 217,805. Extended instructions, a proxy for AVX-class workloads, shows a 38.1% edge for the 211E at 21,592 versus 13,370. Data encryption follows at 32.1% ahead, 17,938 versus 12,187. Even random string sorting, often sensitive to memory latency, goes to the 211E by 31.6%, 34,308 versus 23,451. The multi-thread PassMark score lands at 23,833 for the 211E versus 18,252, a 23.4% margin. Single-thread PassMark is closer but still favors the 211E: 4,006 versus 3,539, an 11.7% edge.

The 210H does claim two wins, and they are worth examining closely. In PassMark physics, the 210H scores 1,040 against 702, a 48.1% advantage. That is the only test where the 210H leads by more than a few points. In PassMark find prime numbers, the 210H posts 53 versus 43, a 23.3% lead. These two results suggest the 210H has a particular strength in certain integer-heavy, cache-resident loops, possibly related to its Raptor Lake-H architecture and per-core L2 organization. However, these wins are narrow in absolute terms compared to the massive multi-core gaps elsewhere.

The average benchmark scores corroborate the head-to-head results. The 211E holds an average benchmark score of 37,829, while the 210H sits at 24,872. That is a 52.1% difference in the database's aggregate metric. The percentile placement also diverges: the 211E ranks in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, the 210H in the 77th. The rival comparisons in the database frame the 210H as competitive with the Intel Core i7-13620H (0.2% behind), AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (0.2% ahead), Intel Core i7-11850H (0.3% behind), and AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (0.4% behind). The 211E, by contrast, sits within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435, and within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and Intel Core i9-14901E. The 211E is competing in a higher performance tier entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The 210H's wins are confined to two PassMark subtests, and neither translates into a broad workload advantage. The physics score of 1,040 versus 702 suggests the 210H handles certain rigid-body or particle simulation patterns more efficiently, possibly due to its architecture's scheduling behavior. The prime number test result, 53 versus 43, points to a strength in small, branchy integer loops where the 210H's per-core resources matter more than raw core count or shared cache size. These are narrow niches. In every rendering benchmark, every encryption workload, every data compression pass, and every general math test, the 211E wins, often by 30% or more.

The 211E's dominance is broadest in multi-core rendering. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show double-digit leads, with the R23 gap at 42%. This is the signature of a chip with more physical cores, 10 versus 8, and more threads, 16 versus 12, plus a larger shared L3 cache at 20 MB versus 12 MB. The 211E also wins every single-core Cinebench test, which indicates its higher base clock of 2.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.90 GHz, alongside the architectural differences, deliver better per-thread performance than the 210H's 2.20 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The single-thread PassMark result, 4,006 versus 3,539, confirms that the 211E is not just a multi-core brute; it is faster on a single thread too.

The data also shows the 211E pulling ahead in memory-sensitive tasks. Random string sorting, which often depends on memory bandwidth and cache behavior, goes to the 211E by 31.6%. The 211E lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, a figure not recorded for the 210H, and this likely contributes. The 210H's wins, by contrast, occur in tests where working sets may fit within a single core's private cache, mitigating the 211E's cache and memory advantages.

The Verdict

The recorded benchmarks indicate that the Intel Core 5 211E is the stronger processor in nearly every measurable category. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, holds a 52.1% higher average benchmark score, and ranks 9 percentile points higher in the global distribution. The 211E leads by 42% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, by 38.5% in R23 single-core, by 38.1% in extended instructions, and by 32.1% in floating point math. These are not small margins; they represent a different performance class. The 211E's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and Intel Core i9-14901E, both within 0.2%, while the 210H's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-13620H and AMD Ryzen 5 7500F. The gap between these two chips is roughly the gap between a high-end mobile part and a mid-generation desktop part.

The 210H is not without merit. Its PassMark physics win, 1,040 versus 702, is the single largest percentage victory in the dataset at 48.1%. For workloads that resemble that physics pattern, the 210H is demonstrably faster. Its prime number score also edges ahead. But these are isolated data points. In the aggregate, the 210H trails by 32.8% in the average benchmark metric, and it trails in every Cinebench generation tested. Buyers choosing between these two should weigh the 211E's overwhelming multi-core and single-core leads against the 210H's two niche wins. The data does not support a scenario where the 210H is preferable for general-purpose computing, rendering, encryption, compression, or math-heavy tasks. The 211E is the choice for those who need maximum throughput, while the 210H remains relevant only for workloads that mirror its specific winning patterns.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E scores 20,389 versus the 210H's 11,830, a 42% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 210H win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, it wins two PassMark subtests: physics (1,040 versus 702, a 48.1% lead) and find prime numbers (53 versus 43, a 23.3% lead).

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The 211E leads in every single-thread test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,878 versus 1,771, a 38.5% gap, and PassMark single-thread shows 4,006 versus 3,539, an 11.7% gap.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each CPU?

A: The 211E has an average benchmark score of 37,829, while the 210H scores 24,872. The 211E also ranks in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 77th for the 210H.

Q: Which CPU has a higher core and thread count?

A: The 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Where does each processor sit relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The 210H is within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-13620H, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, Intel Core i7-11850H, and AMD Ryzen 5 7500F. The 211E is within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435, AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, and Intel Core i9-14901E.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The 210H uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-H variant, and falls under the Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. The 211E uses Bartlett Lake, listed as the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. Both are built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry, and both use an 80 KB L1 cache per core and a 2 MB L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache differs significantly: the 210H has 12 MB shared, while the 211E has 20 MB shared. That 8 MB difference likely explains part of the 211E's lead in cache-sensitive workloads like data compression and random string sorting.

The core configurations diverge. The 210H packs 8 cores and 12 threads, while the 211E offers 10 cores and 16 threads. The 211E's two additional cores and four additional threads give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded rendering, as seen in the Cinebench results. The 210H's die size is not recorded in the database, but the 211E lists a die size of 257 mm². The 210H uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket, a mobile package, while the 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. This aligns with their market segments: the 210H is classified as Mobile, the 211E as Desktop.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 210H carries Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units, a more capable mobile GPU. The 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, a more modest desktop iGPU. The PCIe configurations also differ: the 210H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 211E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The 211E's doubled lane count matters for desktop expansion. ECC memory support is another split: the 210H does not support ECC, while the 211E does. The 211E also lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, a figure absent from the 210H's record.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds set the two apart immediately. The 210H runs a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The 211E runs a higher base of 2.70 GHz and a boost of 4.90 GHz. Thermal design power differs substantially: the 210H is rated at 45 watts, the 211E at 65 watts. That 20-watt gap reflects the 211E's desktop orientation and its ability to sustain higher clocks under load. The 210H's lower TDP suits thin-and-light mobile designs, but it caps sustained performance.

Memory support is identical in type, both DDR4 and DDR5, and both use dual-channel memory buses. The 211E, however, has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, which the 210H lacks in the database. ECC memory is supported only on the 211E. The sockets differ, as noted: Intel BGA 1744 for the 210H versus Intel Socket 1700 for the 211E. The 211E's launch MSRP is $221, while the 210H's is $342, a difference that appears in the record though pricing analysis is outside the scope of this comparison. The 210H's part number is SRQ6RQ5MN; the 211E's is SRQERQ65F. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The 210H was released on 2024-12-17, and the 211E on 2025-01-12, about a month later. Both are marked as Active in production status.