Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a decisive performance hierarchy between these two Intel processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with no benchmark victories recorded for the Intel Core 5 211E. The average benchmark score of 61834 for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs tracked, while the Core 5 211E sits at 37829 average, placing it in the 86th percentile. The performance gap is substantial across every workload category, ranging from a 15.9% advantage in single-threaded tests to a 91.1% advantage in prime number finding.

The Ultra 7 270HX Plus aligns with desktop-class performance from recent high-end parts. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900KF with an average score of 61841, a delta of 0%, and the Intel Core i9-13900K at 61766, a delta of 0.1%. This means the Ultra 7 270HX Plus sits statistically even with those flagship desktop processors from the previous generation. The Core 5 211E, meanwhile, competes with AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 at 37804, AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 at 37762, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37904, all within a 0.2% delta. The Core 5 211E is a mid-range desktop part, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers near-flagship performance in a mobile form factor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm². The Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process with a die size of 243 mm² and a transistor count of 17,800 million. The process node difference alone explains much of the efficiency and performance disparity.

Core counts differ sharply. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads. The lack of hyperthreading on the Ultra 7 270HX Plus means the thread count equals the core count, yet the sheer core count advantage drives large multi-threaded leads. Cache configuration also diverges. The Core 5 211E provides 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus offers 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. Each level of cache is larger on the Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth figures reflect this: 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E versus 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus. ECC memory support is present on the Core 5 211E but absent on the Ultra 7 270HX Plus. PCIe lane allocation also differs: Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the Core 5 211E versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 211E pairs with UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus carries Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Socket types are incompatible: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 211E, Intel BGA 2114 for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The market segments reflect this, with the Core 5 211E designated as Desktop and the Ultra 7 270HX Plus as Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the scale of the Ultra 7 270HX Plus advantage. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 4224 against 2055 for the Core 5 211E, a 51.3% lead. Single-core R15 shows 596 versus 289, a 51.5% lead. Cinebench R20 multicore delivers 17603 against 8563, a 51.4% margin, while single-core R20 shows 2485 versus 1208, also 51.4%. Cinebench R23 multicore gives 41913 versus 20389, a 51.4% gap, and single-core R23 shows 5917 against 2878, again 51.4%. The consistency of the Cinebench deltas across versions suggests the architectural advantage scales uniformly through the rendering workload.

PassMark tests show more varied margins. Integer math gives the Ultra 7 270HX Plus a 28% lead with 122449 against 88117. Data compression shows a 29.7% gap with 493179 versus 346757. Extended instructions yield a 45% difference at 39283 versus 21592. Random string sorting runs 42.8% ahead at 60020 versus 34308. Data encryption nearly doubles the Core 5 211E output, 37813 versus 17938, a 52.6% margin. Floating point math shows 163567 versus 66402, a 59.4% gap. Multi-threaded PassMark score is 48270 versus 23833, a 50.6% lead.

The largest single deltas appear in physics and prime number finding. PassMark physics shows 3843 versus 702, an 81.7% advantage. PassMark find prime numbers gives 482 versus 43, a 91.1% gap. These workloads amplify the core count and architecture differences. Single-thread PassMark shows the smallest gap: 4764 versus 4006, a 15.9% lead. This demonstrates that even in lightly threaded scenarios, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus maintains a meaningful edge.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ despite the Ultra 7 270HX Plus having more cores. The Core 5 211E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a lower base clock of 2.40 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The thermal design power also differs: 65 W for the Core 5 211E versus 55 W for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus. This is notable because the Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers significantly higher performance while consuming a lower rated TDP.

The multiplier unlock status separates them. The Core 5 211E has a locked multiplier, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier. Part numbers differ: SRQERQ65F for the Core 5 211E and SADST for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus. The Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates differ: the Core 5 211E released on 2025-01-12, while the Ultra 7 270HX Plus followed on 2026-03-16. Both are listed as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in multi-threaded workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 41913 versus 20389 for the Core 5 211E, a 51.4% lead. PassMark multi-thread shows 48270 versus 23833, a 50.6% advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do the single-threaded scores compare?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 5917 versus 2878 for the Core 5 211E, a 51.4% lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4764 versus 4006, a 15.9% advantage.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The Intel Core 5 211E has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: What memory types are supported?

A: The Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E and 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every recorded benchmark. There is no workload category in the database where the Core 5 211E takes a victory. The smallest margin for the Ultra 7 270HX Plus appears in PassMark single-thread at 15.9%, which still represents a clear advantage in lightly threaded applications. The largest margins appear in prime number finding at 91.1% and physics at 81.7%, indicating that the Ultra 7 270HX Plus excels in workloads that stress raw computational throughput and core count.

The Core 5 211E retains relevance in specific system contexts. Its support for DDR4 memory allows integration into existing memory infrastructure where DDR5 adoption is not feasible. ECC memory support makes it viable for reliability-focused desktop configurations. The Intel Socket 1700 form factor enables use in standard desktop motherboards, whereas the BGA 2114 socket of the Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a mobile soldered design. The Core 5 211E also has a lower boost clock at 4.90 GHz and a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz, which could matter in power-constrained scenarios where sustained base operation is preferred.

The Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers a 93rd percentile ranking, placing it among the top processors in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900KF and i9-13900K, meaning it matches those desktop flagships in average benchmark score. The 3 nm TSMC process node and 17,800 million transistors provide the foundation for this performance. The 30 MB shared L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth support data-intensive workloads. The unlocked multiplier offers tuning headroom, though the recorded data does not include overclocked results.

The Core 5 211E ranks in the 86th percentile, which keeps it competitive within the mid-range desktop space. Its nearest rivals include AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, all within 0.2% average score. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration with 20 MB shared L3 cache provides solid multi-threaded performance for desktop tasks. The 65 W TDP is higher than the 55 W TDP of the Ultra 7 270HX Plus, yet the Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers far more performance at that lower power rating.

For mobile deployments where performance density matters, the Ultra 7 270HX Plus is the clear choice based on the data. For desktop builds requiring ECC memory, DDR4 compatibility, or a replaceable socket, the Core 5 211E offers specific structural advantages even though it trails in every benchmark. The benchmark data does not indicate any scenario where the Core 5 211E outperforms the Ultra 7 270HX Plus in raw performance. The choice between them depends entirely on platform requirements rather than performance expectations.