Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core 5 211E, which wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Core Ultra 3 105UL takes only 2 wins, and both are narrow. The average benchmark score difference is stark: the Core 5 211E records 37829 against 13061 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, placing the former in the 86th percentile of all CPUs versus the 68th percentile for the latter.

Multi-core rendering workloads show the largest consistent gaps. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 211E scores 20389 against 8742, a 133.2% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the same pattern: 8563 versus 3671, a 133.3% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core repeats the result with 2055 versus 881, a 133.3% lead. The Core 5 211E also dominates single-core rendering, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 2878 versus 1234 (133.2% ahead), Cinebench R20 single-core at 1208 versus 518 (133.2% ahead), and Cinebench R15 single-core at 289 versus 124 (133.1% ahead).

The PassMark suite reveals where the Core 5 211E stretches its lead even further. Data compression shows 346757 versus 93961, a 269% advantage. Extended instructions score 21592 versus 5634, a 283.2% gap, the largest margin in any test. Random string sorting delivers 34308 versus 11179, a 206.9% lead. Data encryption follows with 17938 versus 6354, an 182.3% margin. Floating point math sees 66402 versus 30750, a 115.9% advantage, while integer math records 88117 versus 41171, a 114% lead.

The two Core Ultra 3 105UL victories are marginal and isolated. In PassMark find prime numbers, it scores 44 against 43, a 2.3% advantage. In PassMark physics, it scores 718 against 702, a 2.2% lead. Neither result offsets the broader pattern, but they indicate that the lower-power part retains a slight edge in those specific integer-sieving and physics simulation workloads.

Single-thread performance, while still favoring the Core 5 211E, shows the smallest relative gap among the main tests. PassMark single thread scores 4006 versus 3382, an 18.5% advantage. This is a meaningful difference but far smaller than the multi-threaded margins, which range from 114% to 283.2%. The multithread test itself shows 23833 versus 10285, a 131.7% lead for the Core 5 211E.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different design generations and physical platforms. The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation, built on a 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm². It fits the Intel Socket 1700. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL uses the Meteor Lake architecture with the Meteor Lake-PS codename, belongs to the Ultra 3 (Meteor Lake-PS) generation, and is fabricated on a 7 nm node. It uses the newer Intel Socket 1851.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The Core 5 211E provides 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL provides 8 cores and 10 threads. The Core 5 211E also runs at higher clocks, with a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, compared to 1.50 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. The thermal design power reflects this: 65 W for the Core 5 211E versus 15 W for the Core Ultra 3 105UL.

Cache hierarchies differ in capacity and organization. The Core 5 211E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, but only 10 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite the smaller L3, the Core Ultra 3 105UL has a larger per-core L1 allocation.

Memory and I/O capabilities also diverge. The Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, and it includes ECC memory support. The Core Ultra 3 105UL supports DDR5 memory that depends on the motherboard, also dual-channel, with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, but no ECC support. PCIe connectivity favors the Core 5 211E, which provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Arc Xe-LPG 48EU. Both are desktop market segments and both are listed as Active production status. The Core 5 211E released on 2025-01-12, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL released earlier on 2024-04-07. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E records an average benchmark score of 37829, compared to 13061 for the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL.

Q: How large is the multi-core rendering advantage for the Core 5 211E?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 211E scores 20389 versus 8742, a 133.2% advantage. Cinebench R20 and R15 multi-core show identical margins of 133.3%.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 3 105UL win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark find prime numbers (44 versus 43, a 2.3% edge) and PassMark physics (718 versus 702, a 2.2% edge).

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In PassMark single thread, the Core 5 211E scores 4006 versus 3382 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, an 18.5% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger 133.2% gap (2878 versus 1234).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL does not.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Intel Socket 1851.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 211E | Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL |

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

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 10 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Meteor Lake-PS |

| Generation | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 3 (Meteor Lake-PS) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 7 nm |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 20 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 (depends on motherboard) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

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

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG 48EU |

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

| Launch MSRP | $221 | $295 |

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core 5 211E as the superior processor in nearly every measurable workload. It holds a 133.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, a 269% lead in PassMark data compression, and a 283.2% lead in PassMark extended instructions. Its average benchmark score of 37829 places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL sits at the 68th percentile with 13061. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 211E include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37904 (0.2% higher) and the Intel Core i9-14901E at 37911 (0.2% higher), confirming it competes at a high-performance tier. The Core Ultra 3 105UL, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core i5-9400F at 13041 (0.2% higher) and the Intel Core i7-10750H at 13024 (0.3% higher), placing it in a much lower performance class.

The Core Ultra 3 105UL offers a dramatically lower TDP of 15 W versus 65 W, a newer 7 nm process node, and a higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. It also has a larger per-core L1 cache (112 KB versus 80 KB) and a different integrated graphics solution (Arc Xe-LPG 48EU versus UHD Graphics 730). However, none of these advantages translate into benchmark wins outside of the two narrow PassMark physics and prime number results.

For workloads that depend on multi-threaded throughput, data compression, encryption, or extended instruction sets, the Core 5 211E is the clear choice. For workloads that prioritize extremely low power draw, the Core Ultra 3 105UL has the specification advantage, but the benchmark data shows it cannot match the Core 5 211E in raw performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in all rendering workloads, including Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core variants, with margins consistently around 133%. It also wins every PassMark test except find prime numbers and physics. Its largest wins come in extended instructions (283.2% ahead), data compression (269% ahead), and random string sorting (206.9% ahead). It is the processor for compute-heavy tasks such as video rendering, data compression pipelines, encryption workloads, and any application that scales with core count and high boost clocks up to 4.90 GHz.

The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL wins only in PassMark find prime numbers (44 versus 43) and PassMark physics (718 versus 702), both by approximately 2%. These are narrow margins and isolated to specific integer and simulation workloads. Its advantages lie in its 15 W TDP, 7 nm process node, 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and larger L1 cache per core, which make it suitable for low-power desktop applications where energy efficiency is the primary concern. Its Arc Xe-LPG 48EU integrated graphics and DDR5-only memory support further differentiate it, but benchmark results indicate that for overall performance, the Core 5 211E is the dominant part.