Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core i9-14900KS Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS has an average benchmark score of 81127, while the Intel Core 5 211E records 37829. The i9-14900KS sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 86th percentile for the Core 5 211E.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The i9-14900KS leads by roughly 60% across Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9 scores 50995 versus 20389 for the Core 5 211E, a delta of -60% from the latter's perspective.

Q: Where does the Core 5 211E come closest to the i9-14900KS?

A: The smallest gap appears in PassMark single-thread tests. The i9-14900KS scores 4815, and the Core 5 211E scores 4006, a delta of -16.8%. This is far narrower than the multi-thread deltas, which often exceed -60%.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Core 5 211E lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the i9-14900KS does not have a recorded bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: Are both processors currently in production?

A: Yes, both are listed as Active in production status. The Core 5 211E was released in January 2025, while the i9-14900KS was released in March 2024.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS boosts to 6.20 GHz, versus 4.90 GHz for the Intel Core 5 211E. The i9 also has a higher base clock at 3.20 GHz compared to 2.70 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same fundamental silicon characteristics. Both are built by Intel on a 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm². Both use the Intel Socket 1700 and provide PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The shared platform extends to memory: both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, and both support ECC memory.

The architectural separation begins with the core counts and cache topology. The Intel Core 5 211E, codenamed Bartlett Lake, provides 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i9-14900KS, based on Raptor Lake-R with the Raptor Lake architecture, provides 24 cores and 32 threads. This difference in core and thread counts is the primary driver of the multi-thread performance gap.

Cache allocation differs substantially. Both parts use 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. However, the shared L3 cache is 20 MB on the Core 5 211E versus 36 MB on the i9-14900KS. The larger L3 pool on the i9 helps feed its additional cores and higher operating frequencies.

Clock speeds and power envelopes diverge clearly. The Core 5 211E runs at a 2.70 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost with a 65 W TDP. The i9-14900KS runs at 3.20 GHz base and 6.20 GHz boost with a 150 W TDP. The i9 also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 211E does not, meaning the i9 can be manually overclocked.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the i9-14900KS uses UHD Graphics 770. Both are integrated solutions, but the i9's variant is the higher tier.

The release cadence and positioning differ. The i9-14900KS launched in March 2024 as part of the Core 14th Gen series, specifically the Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. The Core 5 211E launched in January 2025 under the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. Despite the later release, the Core 5 211E is positioned as a lower-core-count desktop part, not a flagship.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep. The Intel Core i9-14900KS wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with no wins recorded for the Core 5 211E.

Cinebench results illustrate the multi-thread dominance of the i9. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i9 scores 5140 against 2055 for the Core 5 211E, a delta of -60%. The R20 multi-core test shows 21417 versus 8563, again -60%. The R23 multi-core test shows 50995 versus 20389, also -60%. The single-core Cinebench tests follow the same pattern: R15 single-core is 725 versus 289 (-60.1%), R20 single-core is 3023 versus 1208 (-60%), and R23 single-core is 7199 versus 2878 (-60%).

PassMark integer and floating-point math tests confirm the scaling advantage. In integer math, the i9 scores 212644 versus 88117, a delta of -58.6%. Floating-point math shows 153975 versus 66402, a delta of -56.9%. The extended instructions test records 45524 versus 21592, a delta of -52.6%.

The largest deltas appear in specialized workloads. PassMark physics shows the i9 at 3381 versus 702 for the Core 5 211E, a delta of -79.2%. Find prime numbers shows 244 versus 43, a delta of -82.4%. These tests reward the i9's higher core count and higher boost clock substantially.

Data compression and encryption workloads also favor the i9 heavily. Data compression scores 803368 versus 346757, a delta of -56.8%. Data encryption scores 47717 versus 17938, a delta of -62.4%. Random string sorting records 89789 versus 34308, a delta of -61.8%.

The narrowest margin is in PassMark single-thread performance. The i9 scores 4815, and the Core 5 211E scores 4006, a delta of -16.8%. This indicates that for lightly threaded tasks, the Core 5 211E is comparatively competitive, though still behind.

PassMark multithread results show the i9 at 60012 versus 23833 for the Core 5 211E, a delta of -60.3%. This aligns closely with the Cinebench multi-core deltas, reinforcing the consistent multi-thread advantage.

The average benchmark score gap is also substantial. The i9-14900KS averages 81127, while the Core 5 211E averages 37829. The i9's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon w5-3535X with an average score of 81115 and a delta of 0%, along with the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX at 81103. The Core 5 211E's nearest rivals are clustered much closer: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 at 37804 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 at 37762 (0.2% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37904 (-0.2% delta).

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i9-14900KS is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. Its 24 cores, 32 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 6.20 GHz boost clock deliver multi-thread scores that are consistently around 60% higher than the Core 5 211E. In specialized tests like physics and prime number finding, the i9 leads by roughly 80%.

The Core 5 211E is not without merit, but its strengths are relative. Its 65 W TDP is less than half the i9's 150 W TDP, and its single-thread deficit is only 16.8% in PassMark. For workloads that are lightly threaded and power-sensitive, the Core 5 211E offers a more modest thermal envelope while still delivering functional performance. Its average benchmark score of 37829 places it near the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E, which are close rivals within 0.2% of its average score.

The i9-14900KS, by contrast, sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon w5-3535X and AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, are statistically tied with deltas of 0%. The i9 also carries an unlocked multiplier, enabling manual overclocking beyond its already high boost clock.

The choice between these two processors depends on workload demands. For multi-threaded rendering, encoding, simulation, or data-heavy tasks, the i9-14900KS is the stronger option by a wide margin. For basic desktop use, light productivity, or scenarios where power draw and heat output are primary constraints, the Core 5 211E provides a lower-TDP alternative with the same socket, memory support, and PCIe connectivity.

The percentile placement summarizes the difference. The i9-14900KS at the 96th percentile is a high-end desktop part. The Core 5 211E at the 86th percentile is a solid mainstream option. Neither processor is a poor choice for its intended role, but the benchmark data consistently favors the i9-14900KS when performance is the sole criterion.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded specifications:

• Cores: 10 (Core 5 211E) versus 24 (i9-14900KS)
• Threads: 16 versus 32
• Base Clock: 2.70 GHz versus 3.20 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.90 GHz versus 6.20 GHz
• TDP: 65 W versus 150 W
• Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Raptor Lake-R
• Architecture: Not listed versus Raptor Lake
• Generation: Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) versus Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh)
• Series: Not listed versus Core 14th Gen
• L3 Cache: 20 MB shared versus 36 MB shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s versus not listed
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 730 versus UHD Graphics 770
• Release Date: 2025-01-12 versus 2024-03-13
• Launch MSRP: $221 versus $689
• Multiplier Unlocked: No versus Yes
• Part Number: SRQERQ65F versus SRN7R

The shared specifications include the 10 nm process node, 257 mm² die size, 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, DDR4/DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, Intel Socket 1700, Intel as manufacturer and foundry, Desktop market segment, and Active production status.