Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core 5 213PE Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 211E compare to the Intel Core 5 213PE in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E records an average benchmark score of 37,829, while the Intel Core 5 213PE records 35,428. This places the 211E in the 86th percentile of all CPUs and the 213PE in the 85th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E uses 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 213PE uses 8 cores and 16 threads. Both share identical base clocks at 2.70 GHz.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE boosts to 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core 5 211E's 4.90 GHz boost clock. The 213PE's higher boost contributes to its leading single-thread scores.

Q: Which chip wins more benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 5 211E wins 4 tests, specifically in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting.

Q: Do the two processors differ in cache configuration?

A: Yes. Each core has 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 in both processors. The shared L3 cache differs: the 211E has 20 MB, while the 213PE has 24 MB.

Q: Are there differences in memory or graphics support?

A: No. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory, use a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, support ECC memory, and integrate UHD Graphics 730. Both use Intel Socket 1700 and offer Gen 5 PCIe with 16 CPU lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits the two processors into distinct roles. The Intel Core 5 213PE dominates the traditional compute-oriented tests. In Cinebench R23, it posts 22,468 multi-core and 3,172 single-core, beating the 211E by 9.3% in both. The margin is consistent across Cinebench R15 and R20, with the 213PE ahead by roughly 9.2% to 9.4% in every rendering test. PassMark multithread shows 26,434 versus 23,833, a 9.8% lead for the 213PE. The largest single win for the 213PE is in PassMark physics, where it scores 1,624 versus 702, a 56.8% advantage. Prime number finding also swings heavily toward the 213PE at 114 versus 43, a 62.3% gap.

The Intel Core 5 211E claims a different territory. It wins the data compression test decisively with 346,757 against 298,804, a 16% lead. Data encryption follows at 17,938 versus 15,916, a 12.7% advantage. Extended instructions deliver 21,592 versus 19,565, a 10.4% win. Random string sorting goes to the 211E at 34,308 versus 32,027, a 7.1% margin. These wins cluster around memory-intensive and specialized instruction workloads, where the extra two cores of the 211E appear to compensate for its lower boost clock.

The 213PE also wins floating-point math (68,587 versus 66,402, 3.2% ahead), integer math (92,089 versus 88,117, 4.3% ahead), and single-thread tests (4,060 versus 4,006, 1.3% ahead). Despite the 211E's higher core count, the 213PE's higher boost clock and larger L3 cache give it broader wins in both multi-threaded and single-threaded applications.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Bartlett Lake generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. The die size is listed only for the Intel Core 5 211E at 257 mm²; the 213PE's die size is not recorded. The core configurations differ significantly. The 211E uses 10 cores with 16 threads, while the 213PE uses 8 cores with 16 threads. This implies a different core topology, as the 213PE achieves the same thread count with two fewer physical cores, likely through hyper-threading on all cores.

Cache architecture diverges in the shared L3. The 211E provides 20 MB shared L3, while the 213PE provides 24 MB shared L3. Per-core L1 and L2 remain identical at 80 KB and 2 MB respectively. The larger L3 on the 213PE may contribute to its strong showing in physics and prime number tests, which often benefit from larger working sets. The 211E's additional cores give it an edge in data compression and encryption, workloads that scale with parallel execution units.

Both processors share the same integrated graphics, UHD Graphics 730, and the same memory controller supporting DDR4 and DDR5. ECC memory is enabled on both. PCIe connectivity is identical: Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The manufacturing foundry is Intel for both. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both use Socket 1700.

Specification Differences

The table below summarizes the fields where the two processors differ:

| Specification | Intel Core 5 211E | Intel Core 5 213PE |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| L3 Cache | 20 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-03-08 |

| Part Number | SRQERQ65F | SA4QG |

Base clock, TDP, socket, process node, memory support, memory bus, memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe lanes, integrated graphics, market segment, production status, and launch MSRP are identical. Both ship with a launch MSRP of $221.

The release date gap of roughly 14 months is notable. The 211E launched in January 2025, while the 213PE arrived in March 2026. The later release explains the 213PE's higher boost clock and larger L3, as it appears to be a refined variant of the same Bartlett Lake platform.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a uniform pattern. The 213PE wins every Cinebench test by nearly the same margin. In R15 multi-core, the 213PE scores 2,264 versus 2,055, a 9.2% lead. R15 single-core goes 319 versus 289, a 9.4% lead. R20 multi-core shows 9,436 versus 8,563, a 9.3% lead, and R20 single-core shows 1,332 versus 1,208, also 9.3%. R23 multi-core delivers 22,468 versus 20,389, a 9.3% gap, while R23 single-core delivers 3,172 versus 2,878, again 9.3%. This consistency suggests the 213PE's clock advantage applies uniformly across rendering workloads.

PassMark tests reveal a split. The 213PE leads in multithread (26,434 versus 23,833, 9.8%), physics (1,624 versus 702, 56.8%), find prime numbers (114 versus 43, 62.3%), floating-point math (68,587 versus 66,402, 3.2%), integer math (92,089 versus 88,117, 4.3%), and single-thread (4,060 versus 4,006, 1.3%). The physics and prime number results are outliers in magnitude, suggesting that the 213PE's larger L3 cache and higher boost clock deliver outsized gains in latency-sensitive integer workloads.

The 211E wins the remaining PassMark tests. Data compression shows 346,757 versus 298,804, a 16% margin. Data encryption shows 17,938 versus 15,916, a 12.7% margin. Extended instructions show 21,592 versus 19,565, a 10.4% margin. Random string sorting shows 34,308 versus 32,027, a 7.1% margin. These wins indicate that the 211E's two additional cores provide a measurable advantage in throughput-oriented tasks that can use all available execution resources.

The nearest rival data places each processor in a different competitive tier. The 211E sits within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E, and within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132. The 213PE sits within 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-12700K, 0.3% of the Intel Core i5-13600T, and 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-12700KF. The 213PE's nearest rivals are all Intel desktop parts, while the 211E's nearest rivals include AMD embedded and mobile AI processors. This suggests the two chips occupy different performance niches despite sharing the same platform and launch price.

The overall win count favors the 213PE at 13 wins versus 4 for the 211E. However, the 211E's wins are concentrated in workloads that represent real-world data handling. The 213PE's wins span a broader range, including both synthetic rendering and general math. For users prioritizing compression, encryption, or extended instruction throughput, the 211E's core count becomes the deciding factor. For rendering, physics simulation, or prime number computation, the 213PE's clock speed and cache configuration deliver consistently higher scores.