Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core 7 150U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear overall winner, but the story is not entirely one-sided. The Intel Core 5 211E wins 15 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core 7 150U secures 2 wins. The margins, however, vary dramatically by workload.

The most striking result is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 5 211E scores 20,389 against the Core 7 150U's 8,883. That is a 129.5% advantage, more than double the mobile chip's output. This pattern repeats across other multi-threaded tests, though with smaller gaps. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Core 5 211E leads by 63.2% (8,563 vs 5,248), and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, it leads by 36.5% (2,055 vs 1,505.5). The Cinebench R23 result is the single largest proportional victory in the entire comparison.

The Core 5 211E also dominates in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 21,592 against 8,748, a 146.8% lead. Data compression shows a similar pattern: 346,757 versus 158,622, a 118.6% difference. These two tests, along with the Cinebench R23 multi-core result, represent the three largest margins in favor of the desktop chip.

In integer math, the Core 5 211E scores 88,117 versus 51,057, a 72.6% lead. Floating point math shows a 93% advantage (66,402 vs 34,405). Random string sorting favors the Core 5 211E by 87.8% (34,308 vs 18,269). Data encryption shows a 78.9% lead (17,938 vs 10,025). Multi-thread PassMark shows a 62.1% advantage (23,833 vs 14,700). These results confirm that the Core 5 211E's advantage is consistent across CPU-heavy integer and floating-point workloads.

Single-threaded performance is closer but still favors the Core 5 211E. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 5 211E scores 2,878 versus 1,875.5, a 53.5% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the same 63.2% delta as the multi-core test (1,208 vs 740). Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 13.8% lead (289 vs 254). PassMark single-thread shows a 14.2% advantage (4,006 vs 3,508). The single-thread gaps are smaller than the multi-thread gaps, but the Core 5 211E still wins every single-thread test in the comparison.

The Core 7 150U's two wins are worth examining closely. In PassMark physics, it scores 1,012 against 702, a 30.6% advantage. In PassMark find prime numbers, it scores 58 against 43, a 25.9% advantage. These are not mainstream rendering or compilation workloads. The physics test likely measures a specific simulation pattern that favors the mobile chip's architecture, while prime number finding can be sensitive to clock speed and instruction scheduling.

The overall average benchmark score in the database tells the same story: the Core 5 211E averages 37,829, while the Core 7 150U averages 17,395. The Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 150U sits at the 71st percentile.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core 5 211E is the overwhelmingly faster processor in this matchup. Its 15 wins out of 17 head-to-head tests, combined with an average benchmark score more than double that of the Core 7 150U, leaves little ambiguity. The desktop chip is designed for sustained throughput, and the benchmarks reflect that design intent.

The Core 7 150U is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, while the Core 5 211E is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP. That power envelope difference explains much of the performance gap. The Core 5 211E can draw more power and sustain higher clocks under load, which directly translates to the multi-threaded victories.

Who should pick which? The data supports the Core 5 211E for any workload that benefits from raw CPU throughput: rendering, data compression, encryption, integer and floating point math, and multi-threaded productivity. The 129.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is a decisive signal for content creation tasks. The Core 7 150U, by contrast, offers competitive physics simulation performance (30.6% ahead) and prime number finding (25.9% ahead), but those are narrow niches.

The Core 7 150U's single-thread performance, while lower, is not catastrophically behind: a 14.2% gap in PassMark single-thread and a 53.5% gap in Cinebench R23 single-core. For everyday responsive tasks, the mobile chip remains capable, but for sustained heavy workloads, the Core 5 211E is the clear choice.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has an average benchmark score of 37,829, compared to 17,395 for the Intel Core 7 150U.

Q: What is the largest performance margin in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 5 211E leads by 129.5% (20,389 vs 8,883).

Q: Are there any tests where the Intel Core 7 150U wins?

A: Yes, the Core 7 150U wins PassMark physics with a 30.6% advantage (1,012 vs 702) and PassMark find prime numbers with a 25.9% advantage (58 vs 43).

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

A: The Core 5 211E wins all single-thread tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it leads by 53.5% (2,878 vs 1,875.5). In PassMark single-thread, it leads by 14.2% (4,006 vs 3,508).

Q: What percentile ranking does each processor hold?

A: The Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 150U sits at the 71st percentile.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Core 5 211E has 16 threads, while the Core 7 150U has 12 threads. Both have 10 cores.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Core 5 211E runs at a base clock of 2.70 GHz and boosts to 4.90 GHz. The Core 7 150U has a lower base clock of 1.80 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz. That boost advantage does not translate into benchmark wins for the mobile chip outside of the physics and prime number tests.

The Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 W, while the Core 7 150U has a TDP of 15 W. The desktop chip uses Intel Socket 1700, while the mobile chip uses Intel BGA 1744. The Core 5 211E supports ECC memory; the Core 7 150U does not. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, but only the Core 5 211E lists a memory bandwidth figure of 76.8 GB/s in the database.

PCIe support differs: the Core 5 211E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 7 150U provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 7 150U uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The Core 5 211E launched at a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core 7 150U has no recorded launch MSRP. The release dates differ as well: the Core 5 211E was released on 2025-01-12, and the Core 7 150U on 2024-01-07.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and manufactured by Intel, but they belong to different families. The Core 5 211E is codenamed Bartlett Lake and generation "Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)". The Core 7 150U is codenamed Raptor Lake-U and generation "Core 7 (Raptor Lake-U)". The Core 7 150U explicitly carries a Raptor Lake architecture designation, while the Core 5 211E's architecture field is not recorded.

Core and thread counts differ despite the same core count: the Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads. This suggests a different hybrid core arrangement, with the Core 5 211E offering more simultaneous threads per core.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The L1 cache is the same at 80 KB per core for both. The L2 cache differs: the Core 5 211E has 2 MB per core, while the Core 7 150U has 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache differs substantially: the Core 5 211E has 20 MB shared, while the Core 7 150U has 12 MB shared. This 8 MB L3 difference likely contributes to the multi-threaded performance gap.

The die size is recorded only for the Core 5 211E at 257 mm². The Core 7 150U has no recorded die size. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning neither supports unlocked overclocking. The part numbers differ: the Core 5 211E is SRQERQ65F, while the Core 7 150U is SRMYP.

The market segments differ: the Core 5 211E is a Desktop processor, while the Core 7 150U is a Mobile processor. Both are listed as Active in production status. The Core 5 211E's higher TDP, larger cache, and desktop socket all align with its role as a socketed desktop part, while the Core 7 150U's BGA package and low TDP align with its mobile role.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in the overwhelming majority of workloads. It leads in all Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, across R15, R20, and R23. It leads in PassMark data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, multithread, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. For rendering, content creation, data processing, and general productivity, the Core 5 211E is the stronger part.

The Core 7 150U wins in two specific tests: PassMark physics and PassMark find prime numbers. The physics win is substantial at 30.6% ahead, and the prime number win is 25.9% ahead. These are specialized workloads that do not generalize to mainstream applications. The physics test may reflect a particular simulation pattern, and prime number finding is a narrow mathematical operation.

The single-thread performance gap is smaller than the multi-thread gap, which means the Core 7 150U is not far behind in lightly threaded tasks. In PassMark single-thread, the delta is 14.2%, and in Cinebench R15 single-core, it is 13.8%. The Cinebench R23 single-core delta is larger at 53.5%, suggesting that the newer Cinebench version stresses the mobile chip's architecture more heavily.

The Core 7 150U's higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus 4.90 GHz for the Core 5 211E does not translate into broad single-thread dominance. The desktop chip still wins every single-thread test despite the lower boost clock. This indicates that the Core 5 211E's larger cache and higher sustained power envelope matter more than peak boost frequency alone.

For users running physics simulations or prime number calculations specifically, the Core 7 150U offers a measurable advantage. For every other recorded workload, the Core 5 211E delivers higher scores, often by wide margins. The data supports the Core 5 211E as the primary choice for compute-heavy tasks, with the Core 7 150U serving a narrow specialized role.