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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and dominant picture: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The magnitude of its victories is substantial, with the Core 5 211E trailing by double-digit percentage points in nearly every test. The largest gap appears in the `passmark_find_prime_numbers` test, where the Core Ultra 7 265K scores 491 versus the Core 5 211E's 43, a delta of -91.2% for the Core 5. This indicates a massive advantage in pure integer-heavy computational workloads for the Arrow Lake part.

The Cinebench suite confirms this trend. In `cinebench_r15_multicore`, the Core Ultra 7 265K scores 5020 against 2055 for the Core 5 211E, a -59.1% delta. The `cinebench_r20_multicore` results are similar, with the Core Ultra 7 265K at 20918 and the Core 5 211E at 8563, again a -59.1% delta. The `cinebench_r23_multicore` test shows a slightly smaller, but still decisive, margin: 35850 versus 20389, a -43.1% delta. These results point to a consistent and overwhelming multi-threaded performance advantage for the 20-core Core Ultra 7 265K.

Single-threaded performance, however, tells a more nuanced story. In the Cinebench R23 single-core test, the Core 5 211E actually wins, scoring 2878 compared to the Core Ultra 7 265K's 2020, a 42.5% delta in favor of the Core 5. This is a notable anomaly. It is the sole test in the entire dataset where the Core 5 211E emerges victorious. The `passmark_single_thread` test, however, gives the win to the Core Ultra 7 265K with a score of 4928 versus 4006, a -18.7% delta. This discrepancy between Cinebench R23 and Passmark suggests the two processors have different performance characteristics depending on the specific instruction mix and workload.

The remaining Passmark tests all favor the Core Ultra 7 265K. `passmark_data_encryption` shows a -62.8% delta (48246 vs 17938), `passmark_extended_instructions` shows a -60.3% delta (54333 vs 21592), and `passmark_floating_point_math` shows a -65% delta (189629 vs 66402). The `passmark_integer_math` test has the smallest margin of the Passmark suite, a -38.5% delta (143242 vs 88117). The `passmark_physics` test is another decisive win for the Core Ultra 7 265K, scoring 3731 versus 702, a -81.2% delta. The data indicates the Core Ultra 7 265K is in a different performance class for almost every measured task.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Core 5 211E is part of the Bartlett Lake generation, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake architecture, and is built on TSMC's 3 nm process node with a die size of 243 mm². The smaller process node and die size for the Core Ultra 7 265K suggest a denser, more power-efficient design despite its higher core count.

The core configurations are starkly different. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating it uses hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads, which means it does not use hyper-threading and relies on a larger number of physical cores. 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 7 265K has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core caches and 50% more L3 cache on the Core Ultra 7 265K provide a significant resource advantage.

The manufacturing foundry is another key difference. Intel fabricates the Core 5 211E, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 7 265K. The Core Ultra 7 265K is also listed as having 17,800 million transistors, a figure not provided for the Core 5 211E. These architectural choices explain the performance gulf. The combination of a more advanced process node, a higher core count, and larger caches on the Core Ultra 7 265K drives its dominance in multi-threaded and data-intensive tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K wins in scenarios that demand high parallelism and raw compute throughput. Its 20 physical cores and 30 MB of L3 cache make it the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, and complex simulations. The Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core results all confirm this. It also excels in encryption and compression tasks, as shown by the `passmark_data_encryption` (-62.8% delta) and `passmark_data_compression` (-47.9% delta) results. The `passmark_physics` score of 3731 versus 702 indicates a massive advantage in physics calculations, which are often heavily threaded.

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in one specific scenario: the Cinebench R23 single-core test. Its score of 2878 versus the Core Ultra 7 265K's 2020 represents a 42.5% advantage. This suggests that for lightly threaded workloads that rely on a single core's peak performance, as measured by this specific test, the Core 5 211E has an edge. However, this result is contradicted by the `passmark_single_thread` test, where the Core Ultra 7 265K leads by 18.7%. The data implies that the Core 5 211E's single-core win is specific to the Cinebench R23 workload, not a general property.

For general desktop use, the Core Ultra 7 265K is superior. Its `passmark_single_thread` score of 4928 is higher than the Core 5 211E's 4006, and its `passmark_multithread` score of 58594 is more than double the Core 5 211E's 23833. The Core 5 211E is competitive only in a narrow range of single-threaded applications where its architecture excels.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several core specifications. The Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The base clock of the Core Ultra 7 265K is 3.90 GHz, higher than the Core 5 211E's 2.70 GHz. The boost clock is also higher on the Core Ultra 7 265K at 5.50 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The thermal design power (TDP) is notably different: 125 watts for the Core Ultra 7 265K and 65 watts for the Core 5 211E. This indicates the Core Ultra 7 265K requires significantly more power and cooling.

The memory support differs as well. The Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 265K supports DDR5 only. The memory bandwidth is higher on the Core Ultra 7 265K at 102.4 GB/s compared to 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E. Both support dual-channel memory and ECC memory. The PCIe configuration also differs: the Core Ultra 7 265K has Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 211E has Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics are different. The Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 265K uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The sockets are incompatible: the Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Core Ultra 7 265K uses Intel Socket 1851. The multiplier is unlocked on the Core Ultra 7 265K, allowing for overclocking, while it is locked on the Core 5 211E. The Core Ultra 7 265K has a launch MSRP of $394, and the Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221. The release dates are also different, with the Core 5 211E released in January 2025 and the Core Ultra 7 265K in October 2024.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher core count?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores, while the Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores.

Q: What is the difference in their L3 cache sizes?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K has 30 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 5 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K supports DDR5 only.

Q: How do they compare in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K scores 35850, which is 43.1% higher than the Intel Core 5 211E's score of 20389.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has a higher score of 2878, compared to the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K's 2020, a 42.5% difference.

Q: Are they compatible with the same motherboard socket?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K uses Intel Socket 1851.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is the superior processor for almost all workloads. It wins 16 out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 70879 compared to 37829 for the Core 5 211E. Its 20 cores, higher clock speeds, and larger caches deliver a performance advantage that is often more than 50% in multi-threaded tasks. The Core Ultra 7 265K is the appropriate choice for users who need maximum throughput in rendering, compression, encryption, and physics simulations.

The Intel Core 5 211E, with its 65-watt TDP and lower core count, is a more modest processor. Its single victory in Cinebench R23 single-core is an interesting data point but does not offset its substantial losses elsewhere. The Core 5 211E's support for DDR4 memory and lower launch MSRP of $221 make it a different class of product. The data suggests the Core 5 211E is aimed at applications where its 2.70 GHz base clock and 65-watt power envelope are more important than raw performance. The Core Ultra 7 265K, with a launch MSRP of $394, is positioned for users who prioritize performance above all else. Based on benchmark results, the Core Ultra 7 265K is the clear winner for demanding desktop workloads.