Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core i7-13700F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the Intel Core i7-13700F wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 5 211E. No single test favors the Core 5 211E. The margins, however, vary dramatically by workload type, which reveals where each processor's architectural strengths lie.

The largest single delta appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the i7-13700F scores 156 versus 43 for the Core 5 211E, a 262.8% advantage. This is a heavily integer-multiplication-bound workload, and the i7's larger core count and higher boost clock drive an enormous gap. Similarly, PassMark physics shows a 218.5% lead (2236 versus 702), indicating the i7-13700F sustains far higher throughput in simulated physics calculations.

Cinebench results are consistent across all three versions. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-13700F scores 32101 against 20389, a 57.4% lead. Single-core R23 shows 4532 versus 2878, also 57.5% ahead. The pattern repeats in R20 (13482 versus 8563, 57.4% multi-core; 1903 versus 1208, 57.5% single-core) and R15 (3235 versus 2055, 57.4% multi-core; 456 versus 289, 57.8% single-core). The near-identical deltas across all three Cinebench versions suggest a consistent per-core performance advantage, not just a core-count benefit.

PassMark integer math shows a 60.4% lead (141370 versus 88117), while floating-point math trails slightly at 51.2% (100422 versus 66402). Data encryption shows a 50.3% gap (26956 versus 17938), and data compression is 36.1% ahead (471838 versus 346757). Extended instructions see a 31% delta (28295 versus 21592), and random string sorting is 45.7% ahead (49974 versus 34308). The PassMark multi-thread score shows a 61% advantage (38369 versus 23833), the largest of the aggregate metrics.

The closest contest is PassMark single-thread performance, where the i7-13700F scores 4121 versus 4006, a modest 2.9% lead. This indicates that in lightly threaded, single-core-dependent tasks, the two processors are nearly comparable. The i7-13700F's boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz on the Core 5 211E explains the small edge, but the gap is far narrower than in multi-threaded or math-heavy workloads.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i7-13700F scores 32101 versus 20389 for the Core 5 211E, a 57.4% advantage.

Q: Is the single-thread performance difference large?

A: No. The i7-13700F leads by only 2.9% in PassMark single-thread (4121 versus 4006), though Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger 57.5% gap (4532 versus 2878).

Q: How many benchmarks does each processor win?

A: The i7-13700F wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The Core 5 211E wins zero.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The i7-13700F has 16 cores and 24 threads. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. The Core 5 211E also supports ECC memory, while the i7-13700F does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i7-13700F boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Core 5 211E boosts to 4.90 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-13700F wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is not about which processor wins a category, but rather about how large the margin is in each category.

For heavily parallel workloads, the i7-13700F is overwhelmingly stronger. Cinebench multi-core, PassMark multi-thread, integer math, floating-point math, and data encryption all show deltas between 50% and 61%. Users running video rendering, scientific simulations, code compilation, or encryption-heavy server tasks will see roughly 50% to 60% more throughput from the i7-13700F.

For single-threaded tasks, the margin shrinks dramatically. PassMark single-thread shows only 2.9% separation. This means everyday desktop responsiveness, office productivity, and lightly threaded applications will feel nearly identical on both chips. The i7-13700F's higher boost clock provides a small edge, but it is not transformative.

For memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads, the Core 5 211E brings ECC support and a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, a feature absent from the i7-13700F. The i7-13700F's score in data compression (471838) is 36.1% higher, but the Core 5 211E's ECC capability makes it the only choice in this pair for error-correcting memory environments, such as certain embedded or reliability-focused systems.

The Core 5 211E also includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, which the i7-13700F lacks entirely. For systems that must operate without a discrete graphics card, the Core 5 211E is the functional option, regardless of its lower compute scores.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several core specifications: both use Intel Socket 1700, both are built on a 10 nm process node by Intel, both have a 65 W TDP, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, and both provide PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The differences are significant. The i7-13700F has 16 cores and 24 threads, while the Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.10 GHz for the i7-13700F versus 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 211E. Boost clocks reverse the order: 5.20 GHz for the i7-13700F versus 4.90 GHz for the Core 5 211E.

L3 cache differs substantially: the i7-13700F has 30 MB shared, while the Core 5 211E has 20 MB shared. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 80 KB per core and 2 MB per core respectively.

Memory bandwidth is only recorded for the Core 5 211E at 76.8 GB/s; no bandwidth figure exists in the data for the i7-13700F. ECC memory support is present only on the Core 5 211E. Integrated graphics are present only on the Core 5 211E (UHD Graphics 730).

The release dates differ by two years: the i7-13700F launched on 2023-01-03, the Core 5 211E on 2025-01-12. The launch MSRP for the i7-13700F is $359; the Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221. The part numbers are SRMBB for the i7-13700F and SRQERQ65F for the Core 5 211E.

Architecture Differences

The i7-13700F belongs to the Core 13th Gen series, codename Raptor Lake-S, with the architecture listed as Raptor Lake. The Core 5 211E is from the Bartlett Lake codename, with no explicit architecture field recorded. Both use a 10 nm process node and a 257 mm² die size from Intel's foundry.

The core count difference (16 versus 10) is the primary architectural driver of the benchmark gap. With 24 threads versus 16, the i7-13700F can process 50% more concurrent threads, which directly explains the roughly 57% Cinebench multi-core delta and the 61% PassMark multi-thread delta.

The L3 cache difference (30 MB versus 20 MB) affects data locality and repeated access patterns. The i7-13700F's larger shared cache helps in workloads that cycle through larger working sets, such as data compression and encryption, where it leads by 36.1% and 50.3% respectively.

The boost clock difference (5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz) explains the single-thread edge, though the 2.9% PassMark single-thread delta suggests the Core 5 211E's higher base clock (2.70 GHz versus 2.10 GHz) partially compensates in sustained single-core operation before boost kicks in.

The presence of integrated graphics on the Core 5 211E and its absence on the i7-13700F is a functional architectural difference. The Core 5 211E can output display without a discrete GPU; the i7-13700F cannot.

ECC support on the Core 5 211E enables error-detecting memory configurations, a feature the i7-13700F lacks. The 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth figure recorded for the Core 5 211E indicates a specific measured memory throughput, while no equivalent figure exists for the i7-13700F in the database.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-13700F outperforms the Intel Core 5 211E in every single recorded benchmark. For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, the i7-13700F is the correct choice. It delivers 57.4% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core scores, 61% higher PassMark multi-thread scores, and 262.8% higher prime-number throughput. The 16-core, 24-thread configuration with 30 MB L3 cache and a 5.20 GHz boost clock forms a substantially more capable processing engine.

The Core 5 211E is not without merit, but its advantages are not in compute performance. It offers ECC memory support, integrated UHD Graphics 730, and a higher base clock of 2.70 GHz. Its launch MSRP of $221 is lower than the i7-13700F's $359, and its 10-core, 16-thread design with 20 MB L3 cache still achieves the same 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database. For embedded or reliability-focused systems where ECC is mandatory, or for builds without a discrete graphics card, the Core 5 211E is the only viable option in this comparison.

For general desktop, gaming, content creation, or any multi-threaded compute workload, the i7-13700F wins by margins that range from 31% to 262.8%. Even in the closest category, PassMark single-thread, it still leads by 2.9%. The Core 5 211E's single advantage is its feature set, not its benchmark scores. Users who need a CPU for pure processing power should select the i7-13700F. Users who require ECC memory or integrated graphics, and can accept lower performance, should select the Core 5 211E. The benchmark record offers no scenario where the Core 5 211E outperforms the i7-13700F.