Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

The benchmark data presents a clear split between the Intel Core 5 211E and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T. The Core Ultra 5 225T wins the majority of head-to-head tests, taking 13 of 17 comparisons, while the Core 5 211E secures 4 decisive victories. The overall average benchmark score favors the Core 5 211E at 37829, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the Core Ultra 5 225T's average of 30468 and 82nd percentile. This discrepancy stems from the Core 5 211E's massive lead in specific PassMark workloads, despite the Core Ultra 5 225T's superiority in rendering and general compute tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in PassMark data compression, where the Core 5 211E scores 346757 against the Core Ultra 5 225T's 233998, a delta of 48.2%. This is the largest margin in either direction and heavily influences the average score gap. Similarly, in PassMark integer math, the Core 5 211E posts 88117 versus 59543, a 48% advantage. These two workloads alone account for the Core 5 211E's higher overall average, despite losing the majority of other tests.

The Core Ultra 5 225T dominates the Cinebench suite. Across R15, R20, and R23, it leads by a consistent 7.2% in both single-core and multi-core tests. Specific scores: R15 multicore 2214 vs 2055, R15 singlecore 312 vs 289, R20 multicore 9227 vs 8563, R20 singlecore 1302 vs 1208, R23 multicore 21971 vs 20389, and R23 singlecore 3101 vs 2878. This uniformity suggests an architectural efficiency advantage rather than a clock-speed edge, as both CPUs share the same 4.90 GHz boost clock.

In PassMark multithread, the Core Ultra 5 225T wins 25358 to 23833, a 6% margin. The gap widens dramatically in PassMark physics, where the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 2053 versus 702, a 65.8% advantage. Floating point math also favors the Core Ultra 5 225T, 82751 vs 66402, a 19.8% lead. The Core Ultra 5 225T also wins PassMark single thread (4348 vs 4006, 7.9%), data encryption (18289 vs 17938, 1.9%), and find prime numbers (284 vs 43, an 84.9% margin).

The Core 5 211E's other wins include PassMark extended instructions (21592 vs 20083, 7.5%) and random string sorting (34308 vs 28774, 19.2%). These victories, while significant, do not offset the Core Ultra 5 225T's broader dominance in rendering, physics, and single-threaded performance.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has an average benchmark score of 37829, compared to the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T's 30468. The Core 5 211E also ranks in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 225T ranks in the 82nd percentile.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T scores 21971, which is 7.2% higher than the Intel Core 5 211E's 20389. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench versions, with the Core Ultra 5 225T leading by 7.2% in both multi-core and single-core tests.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head data?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T scores 284 versus the Intel Core 5 211E's 43, a difference of 84.9%. The next largest is PassMark data compression, where the Core 5 211E leads by 48.2%.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T supports DDR5 only. The Core Ultra 5 225T has a higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s, compared to 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E.

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 threads. Both have 10 cores, but the Core 5 211E uses Hyper-Threading to double its thread count.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores, so a direct performance comparison is not possible from this data.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2, and is fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 225T has a transistor count of 17,800 million, while the Core 5 211E has no recorded transistor count. Die sizes are similar, with the Core 5 211E at 257 mm² and the Core Ultra 5 225T at 243 mm².

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The Core 5 211E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. Both share 20 MB of L3 cache. The larger per-core caches on the Core Ultra 5 225T likely contribute to its consistent lead in single-threaded tests, despite both CPUs having the same 4.90 GHz boost clock.

The Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake architecture, which is a newer design than the Bartlett Lake architecture in the Core 5 211E. This architectural generation gap explains the Core Ultra 5 225T's superior physics score (2053 vs 702) and floating point math (82751 vs 66402), as these workloads benefit from improved instruction handling and memory access patterns. The Core 5 211E's smaller L1 and L2 caches may limit its ability to keep data close to the cores, yet it still wins in integer math and data compression, suggesting its 16 threads provide an advantage in highly parallel integer workloads.

Specification Differences

The most consequential difference is thread count: the Core 5 211E has 16 threads versus 10 on the Core Ultra 5 225T, despite both having 10 cores. Base clocks differ slightly, with the Core 5 211E at 2.70 GHz and the Core Ultra 5 225T at 2.50 GHz, though both boost to 4.90 GHz. Memory support diverges: the Core 5 211E accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 225T is DDR5-only. The Core 5 211E has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 5 225T reaches 102.4 GB/s.

The Core 5 211E uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Intel Socket 1851, meaning they are not interchangeable on the same motherboard. PCIe lanes differ: the Core 5 211E has Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has Gen 5 with 20 lanes. ECC memory support is present on the Core 5 211E but absent on the Core Ultra 5 225T. The integrated graphics differ, with UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 211E and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU on the Core Ultra 5 225T. Both CPUs have a 65 W TDP and are not multiplier unlocked. The Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in workloads that emphasize integer operations and data throughput. Its PassMark data compression score of 346757 is 48.2% higher than the Core Ultra 5 225T, and its integer math score of 88117 is 48% higher. It also leads in extended instructions (21592 vs 20083) and random string sorting (34308 vs 28774). These results indicate a preference for tasks involving database operations, file compression, and encryption-adjacent integer processing, where the extra threads provide a tangible benefit.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins in rendering, physics, and general single-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21971 is 7.2% ahead, and its single-core score of 3101 is also 7.2% ahead. The physics score of 2053 versus 702 is a 65.8% advantage, suggesting superior handling of simulation and game physics workloads. Floating point math favors the Core Ultra 5 225T by 19.8%, and multithread performance by 6%. The find prime numbers result (284 vs 43) is an 84.9% lead, indicating a strong advantage in algorithms with high branch predictability and low memory pressure.

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct usage profiles. The Intel Core 5 211E is the choice for workloads that depend on parallel integer execution and data compression. Its 48% leads in data compression and integer math are decisive, and its higher average benchmark score of 37829 reflects those wins. Users running database compression pipelines, integer-heavy scientific code, or random sorting algorithms should select the Core 5 211E.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the better option for rendering, physics simulation, and general-purpose compute. Its consistent 7.2% lead across all Cinebench versions, combined with a 65.8% advantage in physics and a 19.8% lead in floating point, makes it the superior processor for 3D rendering, video encoding, and modern game physics. The 7.9% single-thread lead also benefits everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications. Despite its lower average benchmark score, the Core Ultra 5 225T wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, making it the more broadly capable processor for mixed workloads. The choice comes down to whether integer-heavy data tasks or rendering and physics workloads take priority.