Intel Core 5 210H vs Intel Core i7-11700KF Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits cleanly between these two Intel parts, with the desktop-oriented Core i7-11700KF taking 14 of 17 head-to-head tests while the mobile Core 5 210H claims only 3 wins. The i7-11700KF dominates the multi-threaded workload categories, and the margin grows with thread count and rendering complexity. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 11700KF scores 20214 against the 210H's 11830, a 70.9% advantage. That is the single largest gap in the entire comparison. The desktop chip also leads by 30.5% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (8489 vs 6504) and by 15.9% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (2037 vs 1757). These results indicate the 11700KF is the stronger choice for CPU-bound rendering, video encoding, and any workload that scales with thread count.

The 210H, however, takes the physics simulation test (PassMark physics: 1040 vs 985, a 5.3% lead) and both single-thread PassMark variants (3539 vs 3368, a 4.8% lead). The mobile chip's single-thread PassMark advantage is modest but consistent across the two identical test entries. The 210H also records a higher PassMark floating-point score ratio relative to its integer score, though the absolute floating-point number still favors the 11700KF (50571 vs 45057, a 12.2% lead). The 210H's wins are narrow, while the 11700KF's wins range from 12.2% to 70.9%. The data shows a clear use-case split: the 11700KF for threaded production work, the 210H for lightly threaded interactive tasks that favor the PassMark physics and single-thread metrics.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and process nodes. The i7-11700KF is a Rocket Lake-S desktop part built on Intel's 14 nm process, with a die size of 276 mm². It uses the Intel Socket 1200 platform. The Core 5 210H is a Raptor Lake-H mobile processor on Intel's 10 nm node, soldered to BGA 1744. The process node difference (14 nm vs 10 nm) partially explains why the 210H achieves competitive single-thread PassMark performance despite a much lower boost clock. The 11700KF boosts to 5.00 GHz from a 3.60 GHz base, while the 210H boosts to 4.80 GHz from a 2.20 GHz base. The desktop chip's higher clocks and 125 W TDP reflect its power-unconstrained design; the mobile part's 45 W TDP targets battery and thermal limits.

Core counts match at 8 cores, but thread counts differ: the 11700KF has 16 threads, the 210H has 12 threads. That 4-thread deficit directly explains the multi-core benchmark gaps. Cache configurations also diverge. Both share 80 KB of L1 per core, but the 11700KF has 512 KB of L2 per core and 16 MB of shared L3, while the 210H has 2 MB of L2 per core (four times larger) but only 12 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 on the 210H likely contributes to its single-thread PassMark win, as more working set can reside closer to the core.

Memory support separates them further. The 11700KF supports DDR4 only, with dual-channel memory and a measured bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The 210H supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure recorded. PCIe capability differs by generation: the 11700KF provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 210H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes. The desktop chip offers more lanes for expansion, the mobile chip offers a newer protocol. The 210H also includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units; the 11700KF has no integrated graphics, which is why the "KF" suffix indicates a desktop part without iGPU. The 11700KF is unlocked for overclocking, the 210H is locked. The 11700KF is end-of-life, the 210H is active production. The 11700KF's launch MSRP is $374; the 210H's is $342.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion for raw compute: the Intel Core i7-11700KF wins overwhelmingly in multi-threaded benchmarks, with margins from 15.9% to 70.9% across Cinebench and PassMark threaded tests. Users who prioritize rendering, compilation, data compression, or encryption should pick the 11700KF. Its 16 threads and 5.00 GHz boost clock deliver a large advantage in every threaded test recorded. The 11700KF also leads in single-core Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23) by 16.2%, 30.5%, and 61.1% respectively, so it is not merely a multi-thread specialist. The only single-thread metric where the 210H wins is PassMark single-thread (3539 vs 3368, a 4.8% lead), which is a narrow edge.

The Core 5 210H's case rests on efficiency and specific workloads. It wins PassMark physics (1040 vs 985) and PassMark single-thread, and it draws 45 W against the 11700KF's 125 W. The 210H also integrates graphics, supports DDR5, and uses a newer PCIe generation. For a mobile user who needs occasional CPU bursts plus a built-in GPU, the 210H is the sensible pick. For a desktop builder with a discrete GPU, the 11700KF offers far higher threaded performance at the cost of power and a separate graphics solution. The 210H's average benchmark score of 24872 sits close to the 11700KF's 25423, a 2.2% gap, but the distribution of wins shows why averages can mislead: the 210H is competitive in narrow single-thread metrics while losing heavily in threaded workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-11700KF has 16 threads, while the Intel Core 5 210H has 12 threads. Both have 8 cores.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the 11700KF scores 20214 against the 210H's 11830, a 70.9% advantage.

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

A: Yes, the 210H wins three tests: PassMark physics (1040 vs 985, a 5.3% lead) and both PassMark single-thread and singlethread entries (3539 vs 3368, a 4.8% lead).

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel Core i7-11700KF supports DDR4 only.

Q: Do these processors have integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 210H includes Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. The Core i7-11700KF has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The i7-11700KF uses Intel's 14 nm process, while the Core 5 210H uses Intel's 10 nm process.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the widest gaps. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 11700KF scores 20214 versus 11830, a 70.9% lead. The single-core R23 test shows a 61.1% edge (2853 vs 1771). Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core both show a 30.5% advantage (8489 vs 6504 and 1198 vs 918 respectively). Cinebench R15 multi-core and single-core show smaller but still decisive leads: 15.9% (2037 vs 1757) and 16.2% (287 vs 247). These results indicate the 11700KF's architectural efficiency scales better with Cinebench's rendering workload, regardless of thread count.

The PassMark suite paints a more varied picture. The 11700KF wins data compression by 45.9% (317712 vs 217805) and random string sorting by 54.8% (36309 vs 23451). It leads integer math by 38.8% (85377 vs 61503), extended instructions by 66.4% (22247 vs 13370), and data encryption by 25% (15229 vs 12187). The multi-thread score favors the 11700KF by 30.5% (23819 vs 18252). Floating-point math shows a narrower 12.2% lead (50571 vs 45057). Prime number finding is close: 62 vs 53, a 17% edge. The 210H's wins in physics (1040 vs 985, a 5.3% lead) and single-thread (3539 vs 3368, a 4.8% lead) are the only cases where the mobile chip outperforms. The physics result is notable because it measures a different aspect of CPU behavior, possibly the 210H's larger per-core L2 cache. The single-thread PassMark win, while small, shows the 210H can match or exceed the older desktop chip in lightly threaded legacy workloads.

Overall, the head-to-head record stands at 14 wins for the 11700KF and 3 for the 210H. Every Cinebench test goes to the desktop part. The PassMark tests split 11 to 3 in favor of the 11700KF. The data supports the interpretation that the 11700KF is a high-performance desktop processor that trades power for throughput, while the 210H is a balanced mobile processor that wins only in narrow, lightly threaded scenarios. The 210H's average benchmark score of 24872 versus 25423 for the 11700KF reflects the overall closeness in aggregate, but the per-test deltas reveal a lopsided distribution of strengths.