Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core i9-14900F Comparison

The Intel Core 5 211TE and Intel Core i9-14900F occupy very different positions in the desktop processor landscape, despite sharing the same Intel Socket 1700 platform. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap across every recorded workload, with the i9-14900F winning all 17 head-to-head comparisons. This analysis examines the magnitude of those differences, the architectural reasons behind them, and what the numbers indicate for specific use cases.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The performance disparity between these two processors is substantial and consistent. In Cinebench R23 multi-core testing, the Intel Core i9-14900F scores 39551 against the Core 5 211TE's 12201, a delta of -69.2% from the Core 5's perspective. The single-core results tell a similar story: 5583 versus 1722 in Cinebench R23 single-core, again a -69.2% delta. This exact percentage repeats across all six Cinebench tests, from R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core variants.

The Passmark suite reveals the widest gaps. In integer math, the i9-14900F scores 177066 while the Core 5 211TE manages 33991, a -80.8% delta. Floating point math shows 119550 versus 26150, a -78.1% difference. Data encryption delivers 34644 against 7231, a -79.1% gap. The narrowest margin appears in Passmark physics, where the i9-14900F scores 2899 against 1278, a -55.9% delta. This remains a substantial advantage but shows the Core 5 211TE is comparatively less far behind in this particular workload.

Memory-heavy tasks follow the same pattern. Random string sorting favors the i9-14900F at 63728 versus 14838, a -76.7% delta. Data compression shows 564207 versus 133434, a -76.4% gap. Extended instructions testing produces 31084 against 8615, a -72.3% difference. The find prime numbers test shows 209 versus 72, a -65.6% delta, while multithread performance reaches 46532 versus 11685, a -74.9% gap.

The average benchmark score confirms the hierarchy. The i9-14900F holds an average of 60008, placing it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs tracked in the database. The Core 5 211TE averages 15370, sitting in the 69th percentile. The i9-14900F's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX at 60099 (-0.2%), AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX at 60104 (-0.2%), and AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D at 59641 (0.6%). The Core 5 211TE competes with parts like the AMD EPYC 7543 at 15477 (-0.7%) and the Intel Core i3-1315U at 15022 (2.3%). This places the two processors in entirely different performance tiers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The i9-14900F boosts to 5.80 GHz, while the Core 5 211TE reaches 4.80 GHz. The base clocks are 2.00 GHz and 1.70 GHz respectively.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses. The Core 5 211TE specifies 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the i9-14900F does not have a recorded bandwidth figure.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the i9-14900F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A).

Q: How do their L3 cache sizes compare?

A: The i9-14900F has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 211TE has 20 MB shared L3 cache. Per-core L2 cache is 2 MB on the i9-14900F versus 1.25 MB on the Core 5 211TE.

Q: What are their release dates?

A: The i9-14900F was released on 2024-01-07, while the Core 5 211TE followed on 2025-01-12.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share several foundational features. Both use Intel's 10 nm process node, both are built by Intel, and both fit the Intel Socket 1700. They also share the same PCIe configuration: Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Both support ECC memory and dual-channel memory buses. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The core architectures diverge significantly. The Core 5 211TE comes from the Bartlett Lake codename and carries the Core 5 generation label. The i9-14900F uses Raptor Lake, specifically Raptor Lake-R, under the Core 14th Gen series. This architectural generation gap explains much of the performance difference. The i9-14900F's die size measures 257 mm², larger than the Core 5 211TE's 215 mm² die. The additional die area accommodates more cores and cache.

Cache hierarchies differ in both L2 and L3. The i9-14900F provides 2 MB of L2 per core versus 1.25 MB per core on the Core 5 211TE. The L3 cache jumps from 20 MB shared on the Core 5 to 36 MB shared on the i9. Both processors use 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The larger caches on the i9-14900F contribute to its performance advantage in cache-sensitive workloads like data compression and random string sorting.

The i9-14900F carries the part number SRN3W, while the Core 5 211TE uses SRQDL. Both are active production parts for the desktop market. The i9-14900F launched with a launch MSRP of $524, and the Core 5 211TE with a launch MSRP of $221. The Core 5 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730 integrated graphics, a feature absent from the i9-14900F. This makes the Core 5 211TE a viable option for systems without a discrete graphics card, while the i9-14900F requires dedicated graphics hardware.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity about raw performance. The i9-14900F wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, with deltas ranging from -55.9% to -80.8%. Its average benchmark score of 60008 places it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 211TE's 15370 average lands in the 69th percentile. The i9-14900F delivers roughly four times the average benchmark performance of the Core 5 211TE.

The Core 5 211TE offers advantages in specific areas unrelated to raw compute. It includes integrated graphics, which the i9-14900F lacks entirely. Its lower power profile at 45 W TDP versus 65 W TDP suggests it can operate in more constrained thermal environments, though the database records no wattage measurements beyond these TDP figures. The Core 5 211TE also carries a lower launch MSRP, listed at $221 versus $524 for the i9-14900F.

For workloads that depend on multi-core throughput, the i9-14900F is clearly the superior choice. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39551 versus 12201 demonstrates a 3.2x advantage. The single-core Cinebench R23 result of 5583 versus 1722 shows a similar 3.2x gap, indicating the i9-14900F outperforms the Core 5 211TE not just through core count but also through higher per-core performance. The boost clock difference of 5.80 GHz versus 4.80 GHz supports this observation.

Systems requiring integrated graphics or operating under lower power envelopes would favor the Core 5 211TE. The presence of UHD Graphics 730 eliminates the need for a separate GPU in basic display scenarios. The 45 W TDP allows for simpler cooling solutions and potentially smaller form factor builds. However, any performance-critical application will benefit substantially from the i9-14900F's capabilities.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ sharply: the i9-14900F provides 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core 5 211TE offers 10 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds also favor the i9-14900F, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz versus 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. The TDP rating stands at 65 W for the i9-14900F and 45 W for the Core 5 211TE.

Cache capacities differ at both levels. The i9-14900F uses 2 MB of L2 per core, while the Core 5 211TE uses 1.25 MB per core. Shared L3 cache totals 36 MB on the i9-14900F and 20 MB on the Core 5 211TE. The die size measures 257 mm² for the i9-14900F and 215 mm² for the Core 5 211TE. Both use Intel's 10 nm process and the Intel Socket 1700.

Memory bandwidth is recorded only for the Core 5 211TE at 76.8 GB/s; the i9-14900F has no recorded memory bandwidth figure. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel buses, and both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities match at Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics situation differs completely: the Core 5 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the i9-14900F has no integrated graphics. Release dates place the i9-14900F at 2024-01-07 and the Core 5 211TE at 2025-01-12.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-14900F wins in every measured performance category. Its largest advantages appear in integer math, where it leads by 80.8%, and floating point math, where it leads by 78.1%. Data encryption shows a 79.1% advantage, while random string sorting and data compression follow at 76.7% and 76.4% respectively. These results indicate the i9-14900F excels in computational throughput, encryption workloads, and data manipulation tasks.

The Core 5 211TE's smallest defeat comes in physics testing, with a 55.9% delta. This suggests the Core 5 211TE handles physics simulation relatively better than other workloads, though it still trails by a significant margin. The multithread test shows a 74.9% gap, and single-thread performance shows a 68.8% delta. Extended instructions testing reveals a 72.3% difference, and prime number finding shows a 65.6% gap.

The Core 5 211TE wins in areas not covered by the benchmark suite. It provides integrated graphics support, making it suitable for systems without discrete GPUs. Its lower TDP of 45 W versus 65 W allows for quieter or more compact cooling configurations. The smaller die size of 215 mm² versus 257 mm² may indicate lower manufacturing costs, though the database does not record such figures. The launch MSRP of $221 positions it below the i9-14900F's $524, though pricing analysis falls outside the recorded data.

The i9-14900F's 24 cores and 32 threads, combined with 36 MB of L3 cache and a 5.80 GHz boost clock, make it the choice for rendering, compilation, scientific computing, and any workload that scales with thread count and cache capacity. The Core 5 211TE serves applications requiring integrated graphics, lower power consumption, or a smaller physical footprint. The benchmark data confirms the i9-14900F as the dominant performer, with the Core 5 211TE offering alternative qualities outside raw compute performance.