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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 211E and Intel Core 7 150UL are both active desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, but the recorded data shows a stark contrast in measurable performance. The Core 5 211E holds the entirety of the benchmark data, while the Core 7 150UL has no recorded scores in the database, leaving its average benchmark score at zero. This absence of data defines the head-to-head comparison as a one-sided evaluation.

The Core 5 211E delivers a multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 20,389, with a single-core score of 2,878 in the same test. In Cinebench R20, it posts 8,563 multi-core and 1,208 single-core points, while Cinebench R15 shows 2,055 multi-core and 289 single-core points. PassMark results reinforce this performance profile: the single-thread score is 4,006, the multithread score is 23,833, integer math reaches 88,117, and floating-point math hits 66,402. Data compression scores 346,757, data encryption 17,938, extended instructions 21,592, find prime numbers 43, random string sorting 34,308, and physics 702.

The Core 7 150UL, by contrast, has no benchmark entries in the database. Its percentile versus all CPUs is 50, exactly the median, while the Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core 5 211E is 37,829, compared to zero for the Core 7 150UL. This means the Core 5 211E outperforms the Core 7 150UL in every measured category, simply because the latter lacks recorded results. The database offers no wins for the Core 7 150UL in any benchmark, and the head-to-head wins count stands at zero for both parts, reflecting the missing data rather than a tie.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use Intel's 10 nm process node and are built by Intel, but their underlying designs diverge sharply. The Core 5 211E is based on the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core 7 150UL uses Raptor Lake-PS and carries the Raptor Lake architecture. The Core 5 211E belongs to the Core 5 generation, and the Core 7 150UL to the Core 7 generation, but the core counts are identical at 10 each. Thread counts differ: the Core 5 211E supports 16 threads, while the Core 7 150UL supports 12, giving the former a 4-thread advantage for parallel workloads.

Base clock speeds show a substantial gap. The Core 5 211E runs at 2.70 GHz, while the Core 7 150UL idles lower at 1.70 GHz. The boost clock tells a different story: the Core 5 211E reaches 4.90 GHz, while the Core 7 150UL pushes slightly higher to 5.00 GHz. The Core 5 211E therefore has a higher sustained baseline, but the Core 7 150UL can burst to a higher peak frequency.

Cache hierarchies differ meaningfully. Both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache is 2 MB per core on the Core 5 211E versus 1.25 MB per core on the Core 7 150UL. The shared L3 cache is 20 MB on the Core 5 211E versus 12 MB on the Core 7 150UL, a 8 MB difference. The die size for the Core 5 211E is 257 mm², while the Core 7 150UL has no recorded die size.

Thermal design power presents a major distinction: the Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Core 7 150UL draws only 15 watts. This 50-watt gap indicates the Core 7 150UL is engineered for much lower power consumption, likely at the cost of sustained performance. Memory support is similar: both use DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. The Core 5 211E records a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 7 150UL has no bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on the Core 5 211E but not on the Core 7 150UL.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Core 5 211E provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Core 7 150UL offers Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also diverge: the Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 7 150UL features Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, which is a more capable integrated solution per its designation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E scores 20,389 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Intel Core 7 150UL has no recorded score in the database, so the Core 5 211E is the only part with measurable multi-core performance.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both processors have 10 cores. The Core 5 211E has 16 threads, while the Core 7 150UL has 12 threads, giving the Core 5 211E a 4-thread advantage.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Core 5 211E boosts to 4.90 GHz, while the Core 7 150UL boosts to 5.00 GHz. The Core 7 150UL has a higher peak boost clock by 0.10 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 5 211E supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 150UL does not.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 watts, and the Core 7 150UL has a TDP of 15 watts. The Core 7 150UL uses 50 watts less.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Core 5 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 7 150UL has 12 MB. The Core 5 211E has 8 MB more L3 cache.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two processors by design intent. The Intel Core 5 211E is a performance-oriented part with a 65-watt TDP, a base clock of 2.70 GHz, 16 threads, 20 MB of L3 cache, PCIe Gen 5 support, and ECC memory capability. Its recorded benchmarks place it at the 86th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 37,829. The nearest rival data shows it within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E, and slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435. This positioning indicates competitive mid-to-high-range desktop performance.

The Intel Core 7 150UL, with a 15-watt TDP, a base clock of 1.70 GHz, 12 threads, 12 MB of L3 cache, PCIe Gen 4 support, and no ECC, targets a different segment: low-power operation. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock and Iris Xe Graphics 96EU suggest a focus on bursty workloads and integrated graphics capability rather than sustained multi-threaded throughput. The 50th percentile ranking and zero average benchmark score mean it cannot be compared directly on raw speed from the database.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded compute, memory bandwidth, ECC support, and PCIe bandwidth, the Core 5 211E is the only option with recorded data to justify selection. For users prioritizing low power draw, a higher peak clock, and a more capable integrated GPU, the Core 7 150UL offers those specific traits, though its performance remains unquantified in the database. The choice hinges on whether the workload demands the Core 5 211E's proven throughput or the Core 7 150UL's power efficiency and integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 211E | Intel Core 7 150UL |

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

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 1.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Architecture | Not specified | Raptor Lake |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 20 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Supported | Not supported |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-04-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRQERQ65F | Unknown |

| Average Benchmark Score | 37,829 | 0 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 86 | 50 |

| Nearest Rivals | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (0.1% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 (0.2% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (-0.2% delta), Intel Core i9-14901E (-0.2% delta) | None recorded |