Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive outcome: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The margin varies by workload, but no single test favors the Intel Core 5 211E. The largest gaps appear in integer-heavy and physics-based tasks, while the smallest gaps occur in memory-latency-sensitive workloads.

The most dramatic difference emerges in PassMark's find prime numbers test. The Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 359, while the Core 5 211E scores 43, a deficit of 88 percent. This workload heavily depends on single-thread integer throughput and cache behavior, where the Arrow Lake architecture holds a clear advantage. PassMark physics shows a similar pattern: 2526 versus 702, a 72.2 percent gap. Floating point math also favors the newer part, with 120735 against 66402, a 45 percent lead.

Cinebench results reinforce the multi-core dominance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 245HX delivers 32358, while the Core 5 211E reaches 20389, a 37 percent advantage. The single-core R23 score also favors the mobile processor: 4568 versus 2878, again 37 percent ahead. All six Cinebench variants (R15, R20, R23, single and multi-core) show the same approximate 37 percent delta, indicating a consistent architectural performance uplift rather than workload-specific variation.

PassMark integer math shows the narrowest margin. The Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 92150, just 4.4 percent ahead of the Core 5 211E's 88117. Data compression follows with an 11.8 percent gap (393071 versus 346757). Single-thread PassMark tests show a 10.6 percent lead (4481 versus 4006). Random string sorting lands at 27.9 percent (47616 versus 34308), and extended instructions at 30.8 percent (31212 versus 21592). Data encryption shows a 40.3 percent gap (30022 versus 17938), and PassMark multithread sits at 37.4 percent (38069 versus 23833).

The Core 5 211E's average benchmark score of 37829 places it at the 86th percentile among all CPUs. The Core Ultra 5 245HX averages 48287, ranking at the 90th percentile. The nearest rival data confirms the separation: the Core 5 211E sits within 0.2 percent of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX trades within 0.7 percent of the Intel Core i5-14600K. The 27.6 percent gap in average benchmark score between the two reviewed parts places them in different competitive tiers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX wins every single-core test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 4568 versus 2878, a 37 percent lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4481 versus 4006, a 10.6 percent lead. The boost clock difference (5.10 GHz versus 4.90 GHz) contributes, but the architectural efficiency of Arrow Lake appears more significant.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: Multi-core tests show a consistent 37 percent advantage for the Core Ultra 5 245HX across all Cinebench versions. PassMark multithread shows a 37.4 percent gap (38069 versus 23833). The Core Ultra 5 245HX has 14 cores versus 10 cores, and 14 threads versus 16 threads, so the thread count is actually lower, yet the per-core throughput is substantially higher.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245HX lists 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the Core 5 211E lists 76.8 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 245HX supports DDR5 only, while the Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The 33 percent bandwidth advantage aligns with the Core Ultra 5 245HX's superior results in data-heavy workloads like compression and encryption.

Q: Do the processors differ in integrated graphics?

A: Yes. The Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so relative graphical performance cannot be quantified from the recorded data.

Q: What are the socket and platform differences?

A: The Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700 and is a desktop part. The Core Ultra 5 245HX uses Intel BGA 2114 and is a mobile part. The Core Ultra 5 245HX also provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 211E provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

Q: Is ECC memory supported?

A: The Core 5 211E supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 245HX does not. This difference may matter for specific workstation or embedded use cases, but it does not appear in the benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 257 mm². The Core Ultra 5 245HX uses Arrow Lake-HX, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The smaller process node and denser transistor count give the Core Ultra 5 245HX a transistor budget advantage despite the similar die area.

Cache organization differs substantially. The Core 5 211E provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245HX provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, with 24 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches on the Core Ultra 5 245HX likely explain its strong showing in the find prime numbers test, which is cache-sensitive.

Core and thread counts also diverge. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating some cores are hyperthreaded. The Core Ultra 5 245HX has 14 cores and 14 threads, meaning no hyperthreading. Despite fewer threads, the Core Ultra 5 245HX wins all multi-threaded benchmarks, showing that the 3 nm process and newer microarchitecture deliver higher per-thread throughput.

The memory controller differs as well. The Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 245HX supports only DDR5. The Core Ultra 5 245HX's memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E. The integrated graphics also differ, with UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 211E and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU on the Core Ultra 5 245HX.

ECC support is present on the Core 5 211E but absent on the Core Ultra 5 245HX. The Core Ultra 5 245HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 211E does not. The socket types are incompatible, and the market segments differ (desktop versus mobile).

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ:

| Specification | Intel Core 5 211E | Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX |

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

| Cores | 10 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 14 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-HX |

| Process node | 10 nm (Intel) | 3 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 257 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 20 MB shared | 24 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

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

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part number | SRQERQ65F | SRVFM |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | Not listed |

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX is the faster processor by every measured benchmark. It holds a 27.6 percent higher average benchmark score (48287 versus 37829) and ranks at the 90th percentile versus the 86th percentile for the Core 5 211E. The 37 percent lead across all Cinebench tests indicates a consistent architectural advantage that extends from single-core to multi-core workloads.

The Core 5 211E is not without merit. Its ECC memory support and DDR4 compatibility make it relevant for specific embedded or reliability-focused scenarios. Its launch MSRP of $221 provides a reference point, though the database does not record a comparable price for the Core Ultra 5 245HX. The desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700) allows for platform-level flexibility that the BGA 2114 mobile socket does not offer.

However, for raw compute performance, the Core Ultra 5 245HX wins decisively. The 14 cores at 3.10 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost, combined with 24 MB of L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, produce benchmark results that the Core 5 211E cannot match. The 3 nm TSMC process and Arrow Lake architecture deliver higher instructions per clock, as evidenced by the single-core Cinebench margins.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX wins in every recorded benchmark category. The largest margins appear in integer-heavy workloads: find prime numbers (88 percent), physics (72.2 percent), data encryption (40.3 percent), and floating point math (45 percent). These results point to workloads that stress the processor's arithmetic units and cache hierarchy, where the 3 nm process and larger per-core caches provide the biggest advantage.

The smallest margins for the Core Ultra 5 245HX appear in integer math (4.4 percent), data compression (11.8 percent), and single-thread PassMark (10.6 percent). These tests likely saturate memory bandwidth or have lower arithmetic intensity, reducing the impact of architectural improvements. Even here, the Core Ultra 5 245HX still leads.

The Core 5 211E's only advantages are non-benchmark attributes. It supports ECC memory, which the Core Ultra 5 245HX does not. It offers DDR4 compatibility, useful for platforms with existing DDR4 memory infrastructure. Its desktop socket allows for user-replaceable CPUs, whereas the mobile BGA 2114 socket does not. For workloads that require ECC validation or DDR4 ecosystem compatibility, the Core 5 211E remains a viable selection despite its lower benchmark scores.

For users prioritizing compute throughput, the Core Ultra 5 245HX is the clear choice. The data shows no workload category where the Core 5 211E comes out ahead. For users with hard requirements around ECC memory or DDR4 support, the Core 5 211E offers those capabilities, but every measured performance metric favors the Core Ultra 5 245HX.