Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records four direct comparisons between the Intel Core 5 211E and the Intel Processor N150. The Core 5 211E wins all four, but the margins vary widely by workload type.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 5 211E scores 2055 against the N150's 422.5, a lead of 386.4%. This is the smallest multi-core gap in the recorded set, yet it still places the Core 5 211E far ahead. Single-core in R15 shows a narrower relative advantage: 289 versus 153.15, a delta of 88.7%. That result indicates the N150's single-thread performance is comparatively closer to the larger chip than its multi-thread showing, though still substantially behind.

Cinebench R23 widens the gap considerably. In multi-core, the Core 5 211E posts 20389 against 2590.5, a 687.1% margin. This is the largest delta in the head-to-head set. Single-core R23 shows 2878 versus 935, a 207.8% lead. The pattern is consistent: the Core 5 211E dominates in every recorded benchmark, with its biggest advantage in heavily threaded rendering workloads.

The aggregate database scores reinforce this. The Core 5 211E has an average benchmark score of 37829 and sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The N150 averages 1025, placing it in the 28th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 211E are clustered tightly: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (37804, 0.1% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 (37762, 0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (37904, 0.2% ahead), and the Intel Core i9-14901E (37911, 0.2% ahead). These deltas are small enough that the Core 5 211E and its neighbors are effectively performance peers in the database's aggregate scoring.

The N150's nearest rivals are similarly close to its average: the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T (1024, 0.1% behind), the Intel Core i3-4340 (1026, 0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U (1024, 0.1% behind), and the Intel Core i7-5650U (1027, 0.2% ahead). The N150 sits among much older or lower-power parts in aggregate terms.

Looking at the specific Passmark results available only for the Core 5 211E, it records 346757 in data compression, 17938 in data encryption, 21592 in extended instructions, 66402 in floating point math, 88117 in integer math, 23833 in multithread, 702 in physics, 34308 in random string sorting, and 4006 in single-thread (listed twice in the database with identical values). The N150 has no recorded Passmark entries, so cross-chip comparison in those subtests is not possible from the data. The head-to-head Cinebench results remain the only direct comparison points.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families. The Core 5 211E is built on Bartlett Lake, a desktop-oriented design under the Core 5 generation label. The N150 belongs to the Twin Lake architecture, listed under the Intel Processor generation with an Alder Lake-N lineage. Both use a 10 nm process node from Intel's own foundry, so manufacturing geometry is identical, but the underlying microarchitectures and target platforms diverge sharply.

Core configuration differs fundamentally. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating hyper-threading support. The N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no simultaneous multi-threading. This explains the large multi-core performance gaps in the benchmark data. The Core 5 211E also runs at a base clock of 2.70 GHz and boosts to 4.90 GHz, while the N150 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz and a boost of 3.60 GHz. The N150's extremely low base clock suggests an aggressive low-power design that relies on boost behavior for performance.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Core 5 211E provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The N150 provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The per-core L1 is larger on the N150, but the L2 is shared across all four cores rather than allocated per core, and the L3 is substantially smaller. The Core 5 211E's 20 MB shared L3 gives it a significant capacity advantage for workloads that reuse data across cores.

Memory support also differs. The Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s and ECC memory support enabled. The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but only in a single-channel configuration, with a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s and no ECC support. The bandwidth difference is exactly 2x, which aligns with the channel count difference. The N150's additional LPDDR5 support reflects its mobile positioning.

PCIe capabilities are markedly different. The Core 5 211E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The N150 uses Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only). This places the Core 5 211E in a completely different class for expansion and discrete GPU connectivity. The N150's Gen 3 lane count is typical of low-power mobile parts designed for basic I/O rather than high-throughput add-in cards.

Both processors integrate UHD Graphics 730, so the iGPU model is identical. However, the surrounding platform context differs: the Core 5 211E is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, while the N150 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1264. The Core 5 211E has a die size of 257 mm², while the N150's die size is not recorded. The Core 5 211E has a published part number SRQERQ65F; the N150's part number is SRPNR.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear separation of roles. The Core 5 211E is a desktop processor with 10 cores, 16 threads, a 4.90 GHz boost clock, dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory at 76.8 GB/s, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and a 65 W TDP. It scored 20389 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2878 in single-core. It sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 37829. Its nearest rivals, all within 0.2% in aggregate score, include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and the Intel Core i9-14901E, which positions it among capable mid-range and above-average desktop parts.

The N150 is a mobile processor with 4 cores, 4 threads, a 3.60 GHz boost clock, single-channel memory at 38.4 GB/s, PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes, and a 6 W TDP. It scored 2590.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 935 in single-core. It sits at the 28th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 1025. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and the Intel Core i3-4340, both from much older generations.

For workloads that demand multi-threaded rendering, the Core 5 211E is the only choice between the two. Its R23 multi-core score is 687.1% higher. For single-threaded tasks, it leads by 207.8% in R23 and 88.7% in R15. The N150's only recorded advantages are the larger per-core L1 cache (96 KB versus 80 KB), lower TDP (6 W versus 65 W), and LPDDR5 memory support. None of these translate into higher benchmark scores in the recorded data.

Pick the Core 5 211E when the workload requires high throughput, large L3 capacity, dual-channel bandwidth, PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, or ECC memory. Pick the N150 when the design constraint is minimal power draw, a mobile socket, or support for LPDDR5 memory. The data does not show any performance scenario where the N150 wins.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 10 (Core 5 211E) versus 4 (N150)
• Threads: 16 versus 4
• Base clock: 2.70 GHz versus 0.10 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.90 GHz versus 3.60 GHz
• TDP: 65 W versus 6 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 1264
• Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Twin Lake
• Generation: Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) versus Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N)
• Die size: 257 mm² versus not recorded
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core versus 96 KB per core
• L2 cache: 2 MB per core versus 2 MB shared
• L3 cache: 20 MB shared versus 6 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 versus DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5
• Memory bus: Dual-channel versus single-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s
• ECC memory: supported versus not supported
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 lanes versus Gen 3, 9 lanes
• Market segment: Desktop versus Mobile
• Release date: 2025-01-12 versus 2024-11-19
• Launch MSRP: $221 versus not recorded
• Part number: SRQERQ65F versus SRPNR

The integrated graphics are identical (UHD Graphics 730 on both). Multiplier unlock status is false for both. Production status is active for both. Process node is 10 nm for both, and the foundry is Intel for both. The N150's architecture field is listed as Twin Lake, while the Core 5 211E's architecture field is null in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Core 5 211E in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core 5 211E scores 20389, while the N150 scores 2590.5, making the Core 5 211E 687.1% ahead.

Q: Does the N150 support ECC memory?

A: No. The N150 does not support ECC memory. The Core 5 211E does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core 5 211E has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s with a dual-channel bus. The N150 has 38.4 GB/s with a single-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 W. The N150 has a TDP of 6 W.

Q: Do both processors use the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both list UHD Graphics 730 as their integrated graphics solution.

Q: What is the single-core performance gap in Cinebench R15?

A: The Core 5 211E scores 289, and the N150 scores 153.15, a lead of 88.7% for the Core 5 211E.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core 5 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The N150 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.