Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Processor U300L Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 211E and Intel Processor U300L occupy very different positions in the benchmark database. The Core 5 211E has a comprehensive set of recorded measurements, while the U300L has no benchmark scores listed at all. This absence of data is itself informative. Without recorded scores for the U300L, direct comparisons must rely on the architectural and specification differences between the two processors.

The Core 5 211E delivers strong multi-threaded performance in Cinebench tests. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20,389 points places it well above typical desktop processors. The single-core score of 2,878 in the same test indicates solid per-thread performance. In Cinebench R20, the multicore score reaches 8,563, while the single-core score is 1,208. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 2,055 points multicore and 289 points single-core.

PassMark results for the Core 5 211E show a balanced profile across different workload types. The multithread score of 23,833 and single-thread score of 4,006 demonstrate capability in both parallel and single-threaded tasks. Integer math performance reaches 88,117, while floating-point math scores 66,402. Data compression scores 346,757, and data encryption reaches 17,938. Extended instruction workloads produce a score of 21,592, while the physics test measures 702. Random string sorting achieves 34,308, and the find prime numbers test scores 43.

The Core 5 211E ranks in the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 37,829 places it in a tight cluster with several AMD rivals. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scores 37,804, a 0.1% difference. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 37,762, a 0.2% difference. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 scores 37,904, which is 0.2% higher than the Core 5 211E. The Intel Core i9-14901E scores 37,911, also 0.2% higher.

These rival comparisons show that the Core 5 211E sits within a narrow performance band. The differences of 0.1% to 0.2% are statistically negligible. The data indicates that the Core 5 211E is effectively a peer of these other processors in average benchmark performance, despite very different core configurations and market positions.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use different underlying designs. The Core 5 211E is based on the Bartlett Lake codename, while the U300L uses Raptor Lake-PS. Both use a 10 nm process node from Intel, but the similarities end there.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the U300L has 5 cores and 6 threads. This difference of 5 cores and 10 threads directly impacts multi-threaded workload capability. The U300L's lower thread count suggests a more modest parallel processing capacity.

Clock speeds show a clear hierarchy. The Core 5 211E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The U300L has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Core 5 211E runs at a significantly higher base frequency, which helps sustained workloads. The boost clocks are closer, with only a 0.50 GHz gap.

Cache hierarchies also differ. 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 U300L has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 cache difference is substantial: 20 MB versus 8 MB. The L2 cache per core also favors the Core 5 211E.

The memory controllers differ in bandwidth. The Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The U300L also supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory, but its bandwidth is not recorded in the database. ECC memory support also differs: the Core 5 211E supports ECC, while the U300L does not.

PCIe connectivity shows a generation gap. The Core 5 211E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The U300L uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. This gives the Core 5 211E both higher bandwidth per lane and twice the lane count.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 211E includes UHD Graphics 730, while the U300L includes UHD Graphics 48EU. The U300L's integrated graphics has fewer execution units, suggesting lower graphics throughput.

The market segments differ. The Core 5 211E is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP. The U300L is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP. The socket is the same for both: Intel Socket 1700.

Production status is Active for both. The Core 5 211E was released on January 12, 2025, while the U300L was released on April 7, 2024. The Core 5 211E has a launch MSRP of $221, and the U300L has a launch MSRP of $107.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear performance hierarchy between these two processors, but the lack of benchmark scores for the U300L limits direct quantitative comparison. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the U300L has 5 cores and 6 threads. The Core 5 211E has a higher base clock, higher boost clock, more L2 cache per core, more L3 cache, higher memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe Gen 5, and a larger integrated GPU.

The U300L has a significantly lower TDP of 15 W compared to 65 W for the Core 5 211E. This makes the U300L more suitable for power-constrained applications. The U300L also has a lower launch MSRP of $107 compared to $221 for the Core 5 211E.

The performance data for the Core 5 211E places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 37,829 is within 0.2% of several AMD competitors. The U300L has no recorded average benchmark score and sits in the 50th percentile.

From the data alone, the Core 5 211E is the stronger performer in compute-heavy workloads. The U300L is the more power-efficient option with a lower launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor U300L has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The Core 5 211E has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The U300L has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 5 211E supports ECC memory. The U300L does not.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Core 5 211E has a TDP of 65 W. The U300L has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Core 5 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The U300L has 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What PCIe generation does each processor support?

A: The Core 5 211E supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The U300L supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 211E wins in multi-threaded compute performance. Its 10 cores and 16 threads provide double the core count and more than double the thread count of the U300L. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20,389 demonstrates strong parallel processing capability. The PassMark multithread score of 23,833 confirms this advantage in mixed workloads.

The Core 5 211E wins in single-thread performance as well. Its boost clock of 4.90 GHz exceeds the U300L's 4.40 GHz. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,878 and PassMark single-thread score of 4,006 show a solid per-core foundation.

The Core 5 211E wins in memory bandwidth. Its 76.8 GB/s measured bandwidth versus no recorded bandwidth for the U300L indicates a more capable memory subsystem. ECC support adds reliability for data-sensitive workloads.

The Core 5 211E wins in I/O connectivity. PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes provides double the lane count and a newer generation compared to the U300L's PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

The U300L wins in power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is substantially lower than the Core 5 211E's 65 W. This makes the U300L more suitable for thermally constrained systems and battery-powered devices.

The U300L wins in launch MSRP. The $107 launch price is less than half of the Core 5 211E's $221 launch price. This positions the U300L as a lower-cost option.

The U300L is a mobile processor, while the Core 5 211E is a desktop processor. The mobile designation suggests the U300L is designed for portable systems, while the desktop designation suits stationary builds.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Core 5 211E has 10 cores and 16 threads, versus 5 cores and 6 threads for the U300L. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 211E and 1.20 GHz for the U300L. Boost clocks are 4.90 GHz and 4.40 GHz, respectively.

TDP differs significantly: 65 W for the Core 5 211E and 15 W for the U300L. The codenames are Bartlett Lake for the Core 5 211E and Raptor Lake-PS for the U300L. The Core 5 211E uses the Core 5 generation naming, while the U300L uses the Intel Processor generation naming.

Cache configurations differ. The Core 5 211E has 2 MB of L2 cache per core and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The U300L has 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core.

Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E, with no recorded bandwidth for the U300L. ECC memory support is present on the Core 5 211E but absent on the U300L. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Core 5 211E, versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the U300L.

Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 5 211E and UHD Graphics 48EU for the U300L. Market segments are Desktop for the Core 5 211E and Mobile for the U300L. Release dates are January 12, 2025 for the Core 5 211E and April 7, 2024 for the U300L.

Launch MSRP values are $221 for the Core 5 211E and $107 for the U300L. The die size is 257 mm² for the Core 5 211E, with no recorded die size for the U300L. Both processors use the same socket, Intel Socket 1700, and both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.