Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 7 266V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall advantage for the Intel Core 5 211E, which secures 15 wins against 2 for the Core Ultra 7 266V across the recorded test suite. The margin of victory varies widely by workload, which makes the comparison more nuanced than a simple tally of wins suggests.

The most dominant result for the Core 5 211E appears in PassMark integer math, where it scores 88117 against 41558, a delta of 112%. This indicates the desktop chip holds a massive advantage in integer-heavy computation, likely reflecting its higher sustained power envelope and additional threads. Data compression shows a similar gulf: 346757 versus 187050, a 85.4% delta in favor of the Core 5 211E. Random string sorting also leans heavily toward the Core 5 211E at 34308 versus 22905, a 49.8% delta.

Cinebench multicore results are consistent across all three versions. The Core 5 211E leads by 23.3% in R15 multicore (2055 vs 1667), 23.2% in R20 multicore (8563 vs 6948), and 23.2% in R23 multicore (20389 vs 16544). Single-core Cinebench shows nearly identical deltas: 23% in R15 (289 vs 235), 23.3% in R20 (1208 vs 980), and 23.3% in R23 (2878 vs 2335). This uniformity suggests the Core 5 211E's advantage stems from architectural efficiency rather than any single benchmark quirk.

The Core 5 211E also wins in extended instructions (21592 vs 15928, a 35.6% delta), data encryption (17938 vs 13822, a 29.8% delta), and floating-point math (66402 vs 56923, a 16.7% delta). PassMark multithread shows a 22.5% lead (23833 vs 19461), while single-thread performance is nearly tied at 4006 versus 3943, a slim 1.6% delta. The physics test goes the other way: the Core Ultra 7 266V scores 1608 against 702, a 56.3% advantage. Prime number finding also favors the Core Ultra 7 266V by a wide margin, 191 versus 43, a 77.5% delta.

In aggregate, the average benchmark score for the Core 5 211E is 37829, placing it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core Ultra 7 266V averages 23297, at the 76th percentile. The nearest rival to the Core 5 211E is the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37904 (0.2% ahead), with the Intel Core i9-14901E at 37911 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 at 37804 (0.1% behind). The Core Ultra 7 266V's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H at 23277 (0.1% behind), with the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V at 23219 (0.3% behind).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 211E boosts to 4.90 GHz. The 266V holds a 0.10 GHz advantage in maximum boost frequency.

Q: How do the Cinebench R23 scores compare?

A: The Core 5 211E scores 20389 in multicore and 2878 in single-core. The Core Ultra 7 266V scores 16544 in multicore and 2335 in single-core. The Core 5 211E leads by 23.2% in multicore and 23.3% in single-core.

Q: What is the biggest benchmark delta between the two chips?

A: The largest advantage belongs to the Core 5 211E in PassMark integer math, where it leads by 112%. The largest advantage for the Core Ultra 7 266V is in prime number finding, where it leads by 77.5%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 5 211E supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 7 266V does not.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 7 266V provides 136.5 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is substantially higher than the Core 5 211E's 76.8 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which chip has more PCIe lanes from the CPU?

A: The Core 5 211E provides 16 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 7 266V provides 4 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, a significant difference for expansion capability.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design approaches. The Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake architecture on a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel. It features 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores that supports simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 266V uses the Lunar Lake architecture on a 3 nm process fabricated by TSMC. It has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no multithreading support.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core 5 211E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 266V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 12 MB of shared L3. Despite having fewer cores, the 266V allocates more cache per core, which may explain its competitive single-thread performance in some tests.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 266V uses Arc 140V. The Arc 140V is a significantly more capable GPU, though the database does not include dedicated graphics benchmarks. The Core 5 211E targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 7 266V is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2833.

Memory support shows a clear split: the Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and ECC capability. The Core Ultra 7 266V supports LPDDR5X, with capacity depending on the motherboard, also dual-channel but without ECC. The 266V's memory bandwidth advantage (136.5 GB/s vs 76.8 GB/s) is notable, though it does not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded tests.

The process node difference is significant: 10 nm for Bartlett Lake versus 3 nm for Lunar Lake. The 3 nm process, from TSMC, allows the 266V to operate at a much lower TDP of 17 watts, compared to 65 watts for the Core 5 211E. The Core 5 211E has a die size of 257 mm², while the 266V's die size is not recorded in the database.

Specification Differences

The two chips differ across most specification fields. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, versus 8 cores and 8 threads for the Core Ultra 7 266V. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 211E and 2.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 266V. Boost clocks are 4.90 GHz and 5.00 GHz, respectively.

TDP differs by a factor of nearly four: 65 watts for the Core 5 211E versus 17 watts for the Core Ultra 7 266V. The Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 7 266V uses Intel BGA 2833. Process nodes are 10 nm (Intel) and 3 nm (TSMC). The foundries are Intel and TSMC, respectively.

Cache configurations differ in all three levels. The Core 5 211E has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 266V has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4/DDR5 for the Core 5 211E versus LPDDR5X for the Core Ultra 7 266V. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s versus 136.5 GB/s. ECC support is present only on the Core 5 211E.

PCIe configurations differ sharply: 16 Gen 5 lanes for the Core 5 211E versus 4 Gen 5 lanes for the Core Ultra 7 266V. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc 140V. Market segments are Desktop versus Mobile. The Core 5 211E launched on 2025-01-12 with a launch MSRP of $221, while the Core Ultra 7 266V launched on 2024-09-23 with no recorded launch MSRP. Both have locked multipliers. Part numbers are SRQERQ65F for the Core 5 211E and SRPMMSRPMY for the Core Ultra 7 266V.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in the vast majority of recorded workloads. Its largest deltas come in integer math (112%), data compression (85.4%), and random string sorting (49.8%). These results indicate strong performance in computational tasks that benefit from many threads and sustained processing. The Cinebench suite shows consistent 23% advantages across both single-core and multicore tests, which suggests the Core 5 211E has a per-thread efficiency advantage despite its higher power draw. PassMark multithread confirms the multicore lead at 22.5%.

The Core Ultra 7 266V wins in two specific areas: physics (1608 vs 702, a 56.3% delta) and prime number finding (191 vs 43, a 77.5% delta). The physics result is particularly interesting because it suggests the 266V's architecture, with its larger per-core caches and 3 nm process, excels at certain floating-point and simulation workloads despite losing the general floating-point math test (56923 vs 66402, a 16.7% deficit). The prime number finding result may reflect the 266V's higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz and the efficiency of its instruction pipeline for this specific computation.

The Core Ultra 7 266V also holds a single-thread performance position that is nearly equal to the Core 5 211E: 3943 versus 4006, a 1.6% delta. Given that the 266V operates at 17 watts TDP versus 65 watts for the Core 5 211E, this near-parity in single-thread performance represents a substantial efficiency advantage. The 266V also provides 136.5 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 76.8 GB/s, which may benefit workloads that are memory-bandwidth bound, even though the recorded benchmarks do not show a win in such a test.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split by use case. For multi-threaded desktop workloads, the Intel Core 5 211E is the stronger processor. Its 23% advantage across Cinebench multicore tests, 85.4% lead in data compression, and 112% lead in integer math make it suitable for content creation, compilation, and other CPU-intensive tasks. The 16-thread count and 65 watt TDP provide the sustained performance that these workloads require. The 86th percentile ranking places it among the top processors in the database, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.2% of its average score, indicating tight competition at this performance level.

For mobile or power-constrained environments, the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V presents a different trade-off. Its 17 watt TDP allows deployment in thin and light systems where the Core 5 211E's 65 watt envelope would be impractical. The 266V's wins in physics and prime number finding, plus its near-parity in single-thread performance, show that it handles certain workloads competitively despite its lower core count and thread count. The 76th percentile ranking places it below the Core 5 211E in the overall distribution, but its efficiency profile is distinct.

The single-thread gap of 1.6% is small enough that most everyday applications would feel similar on either chip. The larger differences emerge in multi-threaded and specialized workloads. The Core 5 211E offers 16 Gen 5 PCIe lanes and ECC memory support, which matter for workstation and server-adjacent use. The Core Ultra 7 266V offers 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth and a 5.00 GHz boost clock, which matter for bandwidth-sensitive and burst workloads.

The recorded data does not show a universal winner. The Core 5 211E dominates the benchmark suite with 15 wins, but the Core Ultra 7 266V's two wins are substantial, and its power efficiency is unmatched in this comparison. The choice between them depends on whether the priority is raw multi-threaded throughput or mobility and efficiency. The database positions the Core 5 211E among desktop processors at the 86th percentile, while the Core Ultra 7 266V sits at the 76th percentile among all CPUs, a meaningful gap in overall performance distribution.