AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins the majority of the head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E takes 8 wins out of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 takes 7 wins. The overall average benchmark score is close: the AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 38221, and the Intel Core 5 211E scores 37829.

Q: How big is the difference in multi-core rendering performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core 5 211E scores 20389, which is 38.9% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 250’s score of 14676. This is the largest single benchmark delta in either direction.

Q: What about single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E leads in both Cinebench R23 single-core and PassMark single-thread tests. It scores 2878 in Cinebench R23 single-core (67.8% ahead) and 4006 in PassMark single-thread (8.9% ahead of the AMD’s 3678).

Q: Which chip is better for physics simulations?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins PassMark physics with a score of 1147, compared to the Intel Core 5 211E’s 702. That is a 38.8% advantage for AMD.

Q: Are these chips in the same performance tier overall?

A: Yes. Both sit at the 86th percentile versus all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 7 250’s nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T with a 0.1% delta, and the Intel Core 5 211E’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 with a 0.1% delta.

Q: Do they use the same memory technology?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports only DDR5. The AMD chip has a higher memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is built on Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, using a 4 nm process from TSMC with a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors.

Core counts differ meaningfully. The Intel part has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads. Both have 16 threads, but Intel achieves this with two extra physical cores. The Intel chip carries 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD’s cache layout is smaller per core: 64 KB L1, 1 MB L2, and 16 MB shared L3.

Memory support splits cleanly. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. AMD supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a higher 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the Intel chip but not on the AMD chip.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Intel Core 5 211E offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: Intel uses UHD Graphics 730, and AMD uses the Radeon 780M.

The market segments are distinct. Intel’s part is a desktop chip on Socket 1700 with a 65 W TDP, while AMD’s is a mobile chip on Socket FP8 with a 28 W TDP. Intel’s launch MSRP is $221; AMD has no launch MSRP listed. Both are active production parts, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for Intel comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Intel Core 5 211E scores 20389 versus the AMD Ryzen 7 250’s 14676, a 38.9% advantage. That is a commanding lead in a heavily threaded rendering workload, and it reflects Intel’s two extra physical cores combined with a larger shared L3 cache.

Single-core Cinebench R23 is even more lopsided. Intel scores 2878, which is 67.8% ahead of AMD’s 1715. That is the single largest percentage gap in the entire comparison. PassMark single-thread confirms the trend, with Intel at 4006 versus 3678, an 8.9% lead.

Intel also wins PassMark floating-point math by 24.6% (66402 versus 53285), and PassMark data compression by 15.3% (346757 versus 300708). Data encryption is close, with Intel ahead by only 1.6% (17938 versus 17661).

AMD’s wins are concentrated in different areas. PassMark physics is a strong point for AMD, scoring 1147 versus Intel’s 702, a 38.8% margin. PassMark find prime numbers goes to AMD by 41.1% (73 versus 43). PassMark multithread favors AMD by 5% (25089 versus 23833), and PassMark random string sorting by 4.3% (35861 versus 34308). PassMark integer math is a narrow AMD win at 3.8% (91565 versus 88117). Extended instructions are essentially tied, with AMD ahead by just 0.1% (21613 versus 21592).

Cinebench R15 tells a mixed story. AMD wins R15 multi-core with 2302 versus 2055, a 10.7% margin. Intel wins R15 single-core with 289 versus 269, a 7.4% margin. The R20 multi-core and single-core scores exist only for Intel (8563 and 1208 respectively), with no AMD comparison available in the head-to-head set.

Overall, the pattern is clear: Intel dominates in rendering and floating-point workloads, while AMD wins in physics, prime-number finding, and a handful of memory-latency-sensitive tasks.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most visible difference: 10 cores for Intel versus 8 cores for AMD. Both have 16 threads. Base clock favors AMD at 3.30 GHz versus Intel’s 2.70 GHz. Boost clock also favors AMD at 5.10 GHz versus 4.90 GHz.

TDP is dramatically different. Intel runs at 65 W, while AMD runs at 28 W. This aligns with their market segments: Intel is a desktop part, AMD is a mobile part. Sockets differ accordingly: Intel Socket 1700 versus AMD Socket FP8.

Process node favors AMD at 4 nm versus Intel’s 10 nm. Foundry also differs: Intel uses Intel, AMD uses TSMC. Die size is 257 mm² for Intel and 178 mm² for AMD. AMD lists 25,000 million transistors; Intel does not list a transistor count.

Cache sizes are all smaller on AMD. Intel has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3.

Memory support differs: Intel accepts DDR4 and DDR5; AMD accepts only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is higher on AMD at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on Intel but not AMD.

PCIe generation and lanes differ: Intel has Gen 5 with 16 lanes, AMD has Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 on Intel versus Radeon 780M on AMD.

Release dates are close: Intel released on 2025-01-12, AMD on 2025-01-05. Intel has a launch MSRP of $221; AMD has none listed. Part numbers are SRQERQ65F for Intel and 100-000001722 for AMD.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different chips with different intended use cases. The Intel Core 5 211E is the stronger rendering and single-threaded performer. Its 38.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 67.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core are decisive. It also wins floating-point math by 24.6% and data compression by 15.3%. If your work involves Cinebench-style rendering, number crunching with heavy FPU usage, or data compression, the Intel part is the clear choice.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is a more efficient mobile chip with a 28 W TDP versus Intel’s 65 W. It wins physics by 38.8% and prime-number finding by 41.1%, plus multithread by 5% and random string sorting by 4.3%. It also has a higher memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s and a smaller 4 nm process. For embedded or mobile deployments where power draw and physical footprint matter, AMD’s advantages in those specific workloads are relevant.

Both chips sit at the 86th percentile, and their average benchmark scores are close: 38221 for AMD versus 37829 for Intel. The Intel chip has more cores and more cache, but the AMD chip has higher clocks and a smaller process node. The choice depends on workload priority. Rendering and single-threaded tasks go Intel. Physics, prime-number tests, and power-sensitive deployments go AMD.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core 5 211E wins in: Cinebench R23 multi-core (38.9% ahead), Cinebench R23 single-core (67.8% ahead), Cinebench R15 single-core (7.4% ahead), PassMark single-thread (8.9% ahead), PassMark floating-point math (24.6% ahead), PassMark data compression (15.3% ahead), PassMark data encryption (1.6% ahead), and PassMark extended instructions (tied within 0.1% but listed as an AMD win in the head-to-head set). Intel also has the only R20 scores listed (8563 multi-core, 1208 single-core), giving it a presence in that benchmark generation where AMD has no data.

AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins in: Cinebench R15 multi-core (10.7% ahead), PassMark physics (38.8% ahead), PassMark find prime numbers (41.1% ahead), PassMark multithread (5% ahead), PassMark random string sorting (4.3% ahead), PassMark integer math (3.8% ahead), and PassMark extended instructions (0.1% ahead). The AMD chip also has a higher base clock (3.30 GHz versus 2.70 GHz), higher boost clock (5.10 GHz versus 4.90 GHz), higher memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s), more PCIe lanes (20 versus 16), and a lower TDP (28 W versus 65 W).

For a desktop workstation focused on rendering, Intel is the pick. For a mobile or low-power system that needs physics performance and integer math, AMD is the pick. The 15 benchmark head-to-heads split 8-7 in Intel’s favor, but the margin of victory matters more in extreme workloads like Cinebench R23 multi-core where Intel is nearly 39% ahead versus AMD’s largest win of 41.1% in prime numbers.