Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265H Comparison

Intel Core 5 211E and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H are two actively produced Intel processors released on the same date, but they target fundamentally different market segments. The Core 5 211E is a desktop processor on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, while the Core Ultra 7 265H is a mobile processor on the Intel BGA 2049 socket. Benchmark results show a clear split: the Core Ultra 7 265H dominates in raw multi-threaded throughput and most computational workloads, but the Core 5 211E counterattacks with significant wins in single-core performance and specific integer-based tasks. The data shows 13 benchmark wins for the Core Ultra 7 265H against 4 wins for the Core 5 211E, yet the nature of those wins matters more than the count.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is the clear winner for heavily threaded and latency-sensitive workloads. Its 16 cores and 16 threads give it a substantial advantage in multi-core applications, as evidenced by its PassMark multithread score of 34027, which is 30% ahead of the Core 5 211E's 23833. The Ultra 7 also wins decisively in floating-point math, scoring 109123 versus 66402, a 39.1% advantage. This makes it the stronger choice for scientific calculations, physics simulations, and any workload that leverages parallel floating-point execution. The PassMark physics test shows a massive 71.9% lead for the Ultra 7 with a score of 2497 against 702, confirming its superiority in simulation and physics-based compute tasks.

The Core 5 211E wins in a narrower but important set of scenarios. Its most striking victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 2878 against the Ultra 7's 2080, a 38.4% advantage. This suggests that for lightly threaded applications that depend on a single high-frequency core, the Core 5 211E is significantly faster. It also edges out the Ultra 7 in integer math (88117 vs 85479, a 3.1% lead) and data compression (346757 vs 334711, a 3.6% lead). The Cinebench R23 multi-core test is another win for the Core 5 211E, scoring 20389 versus 19940, a 2.3% margin, which is notable given the Ultra 7's core count advantage.

The pattern is clear: the Core Ultra 7 265H is the general-purpose performance leader, particularly in multi-threaded and floating-point workloads, while the Core 5 211E has specific strengths in single-threaded tasks and certain integer operations. The wins for the Core 5 211E in compression and integer math suggest it may be better suited for database operations or sorting algorithms that are not heavily parallelized.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different architectures. The Core 5 211E is based on the Bartlett Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. It features 10 cores and 16 threads, with a die size of 257 mm². The Core Ultra 7 265H uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-H, built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it is a 16-core processor without hyper-threading, while the Core 5 211E has 10 cores with hyper-threading to reach 16 threads.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. 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 7 265H has substantially more: 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This larger cache configuration on the Ultra 7 likely contributes to its performance in data-heavy workloads, though the Core 5 211E still manages to win in some cache-sensitive tests.

The memory support also differs. The Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 265H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Both processors support ECC memory. The PCIe configuration differs as well: the Core 5 211E offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 265H offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ, with the Core 5 211E using UHD Graphics 730 and the Core Ultra 7 265H using Arc Graphics 140T.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Core Ultra 7 265H comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it scores 335 versus the Core 5 211E's 43, a staggering 87.2% advantage. This test is highly parallel and benefits enormously from the Ultra 7's 16 physical cores. The physics test shows a 71.9% lead for the Ultra 7, and floating-point math shows a 39.1% lead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 2989 against 2055, a 31.2% advantage, and in Cinebench R20 multi-core, it leads 12131 to 8563, a 29.4% margin. The PassMark multithread test shows a 30% lead, and data encryption shows a 31% lead for the Ultra 7 (26005 vs 17938).

The Core 5 211E's biggest win is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it leads by 38.4% (2878 vs 2080). This is a remarkable result, indicating that the Core 5 211E's single-core performance is far superior to the Ultra 7's, likely due to higher core clocks and architecture efficiency. The Core 5 211E also wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 2.3%, data compression by 3.6%, and integer math by 3.1%. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result is particularly interesting because the Ultra 7 has 16 cores versus 10, yet still loses, suggesting that the Core 5 211E's higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz (versus 5.30 GHz for the Ultra 7) is not the only factor, and that the R23 workload may be sensitive to memory bandwidth or cache efficiency where the Core 5 211E holds its own.

In single-core tests, the Ultra 7 wins in Cinebench R15 (307 vs 289, a 5.9% lead), Cinebench R20 (1712 vs 1208, a 29.4% lead), and PassMark single-thread (4334 vs 4006, a 7.6% lead). This creates an inconsistent picture: the Ultra 7 wins in R15 and R20 single-core, but loses badly in R23 single-core. This suggests that the R23 workload may have changed in a way that favors the Core 5 211E's architecture, possibly due to different instruction sequences or cache usage patterns.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is core count: the Core 5 211E has 10 cores, while the Core Ultra 7 265H has 16 cores. Both have 16 threads. The base clock is lower on the Ultra 7 at 2.20 GHz versus 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 211E, but the boost clock is higher on the Ultra 7 at 5.30 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The TDP differs substantially: the Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Core Ultra 7 265H has a TDP of 28 watts, reflecting the mobile market segment of the latter.

The socket is different: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 211E, Intel BGA 2049 for the Core Ultra 7 265H. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 5 211E versus 3 nm for the Core Ultra 7 265H, with the latter manufactured by TSMC. The die size is 257 mm² for the Core 5 211E, while no die size is recorded for the Ultra 7. Cache sizes differ as detailed above. Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 5 211E, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Ultra 7. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E versus 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7. PCIe lanes differ: 16 lanes for the Core 5 211E versus 8 lanes for the Ultra 7. Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc Graphics 140T. The Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 7. Both have locked multipliers and are actively produced.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The results are mixed. The Core Ultra 7 265H wins in Cinebench R15 single-core (307 vs 289), Cinebench R20 single-core (1712 vs 1208), and PassMark single-thread (4334 vs 4006). However, the Core 5 211E wins decisively in Cinebench R23 single-core by 38.4% (2878 vs 2080).

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has a higher boost clock at 5.30 GHz, compared to 4.90 GHz for the Intel Core 5 211E.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 5 211E and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 5 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 watts, suitable for desktop use, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has a TDP of 28 watts, designed for mobile platforms.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy, but the right choice depends on the use case. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is the stronger processor overall, with an average benchmark score of 41621 versus 37829 for the Core 5 211E. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, including all the major multi-threaded tests: Cinebench R15 multi-core, Cinebench R20 multi-core, PassMark multithread, physics, floating-point math, data encryption, extended instructions, and prime number finding. Its 16 cores and 3 nm process node deliver substantial performance in parallel workloads, and its higher memory bandwidth and larger caches support this advantage. The Ultra 7 also has a higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz and better integrated graphics with Arc Graphics 140T.

The Intel Core 5 211E is the better choice specifically for workloads that rely on single-threaded performance in the Cinebench R23 test, where it leads by 38.4%, and for integer math and data compression tasks where it holds small but consistent leads. Its larger 65-watt TDP and desktop socket suggest it is designed for embedded or desktop systems where power efficiency is less critical. Its 10 nm process is older than the Ultra 7's 3 nm node, but the Core 5 211E still manages to win in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 2.3%, a surprising result given the core count disadvantage.

For general-purpose computing, simulation, and multi-threaded applications, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is the clear winner. For specific integer-heavy workloads or applications that match the Cinebench R23 single-core profile, the Intel Core 5 211E offers a competitive alternative. The percentile rankings support this: the Ultra 7 sits at the 88th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 5 211E sits at the 86th percentile. The data shows that the Ultra 7 is the more capable processor across the board, with the Core 5 211E serving as a specialized option in niche workloads.