Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL Comparison

Intel Core 5 211E and Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL are both active desktop processors from Intel, but they serve different segments of the market. The Core 5 211E, built on the Bartlett Lake architecture, delivers a full suite of benchmark data, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL, based on Meteor Lake-PS, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This distinction shapes the entire comparison: the Core 5 211E is a measurable performer with a strong showing in synthetic workloads, whereas the Core Ultra 5 135HL can only be assessed through its architectural and specification differences.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in every measurable benchmark category because it is the only one of the two with recorded scores. The database shows no benchmark results for the Core Ultra 5 135HL, so task-specific wins for that chip cannot be established from recorded data. The Core 5 211E posts scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests, covering multi-core rendering, single-core performance, encryption, compression, and mathematical workloads.

The Core 5 211E achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20389 and a single-core score of 2878. In Passmark tests, it records 23833 in multithread, 4006 in single-thread, 88117 in integer math, and 66402 in floating point math. These figures place the Core 5 211E at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 37829.

The Core Ultra 5 135HL has no wins in the benchmark section because no data exists. Its case must be made through specifications, not recorded performance. It offers more cores and threads, a newer architecture, and a higher memory bandwidth rating, but none of those translate into measurable benchmark victories in this dataset. The recorded data indicates that the Core 5 211E is the only chip with verified performance results, so any use-case split based on benchmark wins defaults entirely to that processor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is listed under the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. The Core Ultra 5 135HL uses the Meteor Lake codename and is listed under the Ultra 5 (Meteor Lake-PS) generation, with a series designation of Core Ultra Series 1.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The Core 5 211E is built on a 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses a 7 nm node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the smaller node on the Ultra part suggests a newer manufacturing approach. The Core 5 211E has a die size of 257 mm², while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has no die size recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts differ. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. The cache hierarchy also differs. The Core 5 211E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 135HL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 211E carries more L3 cache overall, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has more L1 cache per core.

The integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Arc Xe-LPG 128EU. Memory support also diverges: the Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL supports DDR5 with capacity depending on the motherboard. The Core 5 211E supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL does not.

The PCIe configurations are different. The Core 5 211E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. This gives the Core 5 211E a wider and faster PCIe interface. Memory bandwidth is higher on the Core Ultra 5 135HL, rated at 89.6 GB/s, compared to 76.8 GB/s on the Core 5 211E.

Clock speeds are lower on the Core Ultra 5 135HL. It has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Core 5 211E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Core 5 211E also has a higher TDP of 65 watts, compared to 45 watts for the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

Socket compatibility differs. The Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Intel Socket 1851. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has no launch MSRP recorded.

Release dates are close but not identical. The Core 5 211E was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL was released earlier on 2024-04-07. Both are listed as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data shows that the Intel Core 5 211E is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark performance. It sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 37829. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, which scores 37804 with a delta of 0.1 percent, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435, which scores 37762 with a delta of 0.2 percent, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, which scores 37904 with a delta of -0.2 percent, and the Intel Core i9-14901E, which scores 37911 with a delta of -0.2 percent. The Core 5 211E is effectively in a tight cluster with those four processors, within a range of roughly 0.4 percent.

The Core Ultra 5 135HL has no benchmark scores, no average benchmark score, and no nearest rivals in the database. It sits at the 50th percentile of all CPUs, which is the default position for a processor without recorded test data. On specifications alone, it offers more cores, more threads, a smaller process node, higher memory bandwidth, and a newer architecture. The Core 5 211E counters with higher clock speeds, more L3 cache, ECC support, PCIe Gen 5, and a broader memory compatibility list.

For users who rely on measured performance, the Core 5 211E is the clear choice because it has verified results. For users who prioritize the architectural advantages of Meteor Lake, the Core Ultra 5 135HL offers a different feature set, but the database provides no evidence of how that translates into actual performance. The verdict from the recorded data is that the Core 5 211E is the benchmark-verified processor, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL remains uncharacterized in terms of measured output.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20389. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded Cinebench R23 score in the database.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 135HL support ECC memory?

A: No, the Core Ultra 5 135HL does not support ECC memory. The Core 5 211E does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E is built on a 10 nm process node. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL is built on a 7 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has an average benchmark score of 37829. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has an average benchmark score of 0.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark comparison is one-sided because the Core Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded scores. The Core 5 211E therefore records all the measurable wins, though the database lists zero wins for both processors in the head-to-head field, which reflects the absence of paired data.

In Cinebench R15, the Core 5 211E scores 2055 in multi-core and 289 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 8563 in multi-core and 1208 in single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 20389 in multi-core and 2878 in single-core. These Cinebench results show a consistent pattern: the multi-core scores are substantially higher than the single-core scores, which is expected given the 10-core, 16-thread configuration.

The Passmark results for the Core 5 211E cover a broad range of workloads. The data compression score is 346757, while the data encryption score is 17938. Extended instructions score 21592, and finding prime numbers scores 43. Floating point math scores 66402, and integer math scores 88117. Multithread performance scores 23833, while physics scores 702. Random string sorting scores 34308, and single-thread performance scores 4006.

The average benchmark score for the Core 5 211E is 37829, placing it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly grouped. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has an average score of 37804, which is 0.1 percent lower. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has an average score of 37762, which is 0.2 percent lower. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 has an average score of 37904, which is 0.2 percent higher. The Intel Core i9-14901E has an average score of 37911, which is 0.2 percent higher. The Core 5 211E sits between these rivals, with its score of 37829 landing just above the two AMD AI Embedded and AI 5 PRO parts and just below the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E.

The largest single-score advantage for the Core 5 211E within its own benchmark suite is the data compression score of 346757, which dwarfs its other Passmark results. The smallest score is the find prime numbers test at 43. The multithread score of 23833 is roughly six times the single-thread score of 4006, indicating strong scaling across the 16 threads.

Because the Core Ultra 5 135HL has no scores in any of these tests, there are no exact deltas to report between the two chips. The database shows no head-to-head entries, so a direct numerical comparison across identical workloads is impossible. The only comparative data comes from the nearest rivals of the Core 5 211E, which do not include the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz versus 1.70 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. TDP is 65 watts versus 45 watts.

The Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Intel Socket 1851. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 5 211E and 7 nm for the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The die size is 257 mm² for the Core 5 211E, with no die size recorded for the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

Cache configurations differ. L1 cache is 80 KB per core on the Core 5 211E and 112 KB per core on the Core Ultra 5 135HL. L2 cache is 2 MB per core on both. L3 cache is 20 MB shared on the Core 5 211E and 18 MB shared on the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

Memory support differs. The Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL supports DDR5 with capacity depending on the motherboard. Memory bus is dual-channel on both. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s on the Core 5 211E and 89.6 GB/s on the Core Ultra 5 135HL. ECC memory is supported on the Core 5 211E but not on the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

PCIe configurations differ. The Core 5 211E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 211E and Arc Xe-LPG 128EU on the Core Ultra 5 135HL.

The Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has no launch MSRP recorded. The Core 5 211E was released on 2025-01-12, and the Core Ultra 5 135HL was released on 2024-04-07. Both are active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are SRQERQ65F for the Core 5 211E and SRN33 for the Core Ultra 5 135HL. The Core Ultra 5 135HL is in the Core Ultra Series 1, while the Core 5 211E has no series designation.