Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous picture: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core 5 211TE. There are no recorded wins for the 211TE in any of the tested workloads. The margin of victory varies substantially across the suite, ranging from a modest 9% advantage in Cinebench R23 single-core to a commanding 79.5% lead in PassMark's find prime numbers test.

Starting with the single-threaded results, the Ultra 5 225F posts a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1893 versus 1722 for the 211TE, a 9% gap. The delta widens in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Ultra 5 scores 1561 against 723, representing a 53.7% lead. In PassMark single-thread testing, the Ultra 5 records 4397 points, which is 68% ahead of the 211TE's 1408. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows the Ultra 5 at 287 versus 173, a 39.7% advantage.

Multi-core workloads amplify the Ultra 5's dominance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 scores 16467 against 12201, a 25.9% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a much wider gap: 11059 versus 5124, a 53.7% difference. The R15 multi-core test produces 2660 for the Ultra 5 against 1229 for the 211TE, a 53.8% margin.

The PassMark suite reveals even larger disparities. Data compression shows the Ultra 5 at 310843 versus 133434, a 57.1% lead. Data encryption results are 22648 versus 7231, a 68.1% gap. Extended instructions testing yields 28027 for the Ultra 5 against 8615, a 69.3% difference. The find prime numbers test is the most lopsided of all: 352 versus 72, a 79.5% margin. Floating point math shows 92554 versus 26150, a 71.7% lead. Integer math results are 66417 versus 33991, a 48.8% gap. The multithread benchmark shows 31004 versus 11685, a 62.3% difference. Physics testing gives 2430 versus 1278, a 47.4% lead, and random string sorting shows 37325 versus 14838, a 60.2% margin.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture. The Ultra 5 225F has an average score of 37313, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The 211TE averages 15370, placing it in the 69th percentile. The Ultra 5's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HK (37425, a 0.3% difference) and the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H (37161, a 0.4% gap). The 211TE's nearest competition includes the AMD EPYC 7543 (15477, a 0.7% gap) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U (15682, a 2% difference).

# The Verdict

The data is decisive: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F outperforms the Intel Core 5 211TE in every recorded benchmark. For workloads that depend on integer math, encryption, or extended instruction sets, the Ultra 5's advantages are particularly pronounced, with margins ranging from 48.8% to 69.3%. For single-threaded tasks that are less parallelizable, the Ultra 5 still maintains a clear lead, though the smallest margin of the entire suite appears in Cinebench R23 single-core at 9%.

The 211TE does offer certain platform-level attributes that the Ultra 5 lacks. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5. The 211TE also includes ECC memory support, which the Ultra 5 does not provide. The 211TE has integrated UHD Graphics 730, whereas the Ultra 5 has no integrated graphics. These differences matter for specific use cases, but they do not offset the raw performance gap.

The performance difference also shows up in the percentile rankings. The Ultra 5 sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the 211TE sits in the 69th percentile. This means the Ultra 5 outperforms a much larger portion of the CPU landscape. The 211TE's position among its nearest rivals is tighter, with deltas of only 0.7% to 2.3% against the AMD EPYC 7543, AMD EPYC 7702P, AMD Ryzen 3 7440U, and Intel Core i3-1315U. The Ultra 5's nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its average score, indicating that it sits in a highly competitive performance tier.

Users who require ECC memory support, integrated graphics, or DDR4 compatibility would need to choose the 211TE despite its performance disadvantage. Users who prioritize raw compute throughput across all measured categories should select the Ultra 5 225F. The launch MSRP for the 211TE is $221, and the launch MSRP for the Ultra 5 225F is $231.

# Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and manufacturing processes. The Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on Intel's 10 nm process node with a die size of 215 mm². The Core Ultra 5 225F uses the Arrow Lake-S codename with the Arrow Lake architecture and is built on TSMC's 3 nm process node with a die size of 243 mm². The Ultra 5 also lists a transistor count of 17,800 million, while the 211TE's transistor count is not recorded.

Both processors have 10 cores, but the thread counts differ. The 211TE supports 16 threads, while the Ultra 5 supports 10 threads. This means the 211TE has hyper-threading capability that the Ultra 5 does not provide. Despite the thread disadvantage, the Ultra 5 still dominates multi-threaded benchmarks, indicating that its per-core efficiency and higher clock speeds more than compensate.

Clock speeds favor the Ultra 5 as well. The 211TE has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Ultra 5 has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Ultra 5's higher base clock is particularly notable for sustained workloads, while the boost clocks are similar.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The 211TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches on the Ultra 5 likely contribute to its strong single-threaded performance.

Memory support also diverges. The 211TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Ultra 5 supports only DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Ultra 5's higher memory bandwidth could benefit memory-intensive workloads.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The 211TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 5 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 5 offers four additional PCIe lanes for expansion.

The sockets are incompatible. The 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851. This means the two processors require different motherboards. The 211TE belongs to the Core 5 generation (Bartlett Lake), while the Ultra 5 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation.

Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The 211TE's part number is SRQDL, and the Ultra 5's part number is SRQD2SRVF9.

# FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 threads, despite both having 10 cores.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The 211TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

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

Q: What are the L3 cache sizes for each processor?

A: Both processors have 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, compared to 4.80 GHz for the Intel Core 5 211TE.

Q: Do these processors use the same motherboard socket?

A: No. The 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851.

# Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins in every measured benchmark category. Its largest advantages appear in PassMark's find prime numbers test (79.5% lead), floating point math (71.7%), and extended instructions (69.3%). These results indicate that the Ultra 5 is particularly strong in workloads that stress arithmetic calculations, encryption, and specialized instruction sets.

The Ultra 5 also shows substantial leads in data encryption (68.1%), single-threaded PassMark testing (68%), and multithreaded PassMark testing (62.3%). Random string sorting shows a 60.2% advantage, and data compression shows a 57.1% lead. Cinebench multi-core results show margins of 53.8% in R15 and 53.7% in R20, with the R23 multi-core margin at 25.9%.

The smallest margin for the Ultra 5 is in Cinebench R23 single-core at 9%, followed by the 39.7% lead in R15 single-core and the 53.7% lead in R20 single-core. Even in its weakest category, the Ultra 5 maintains a meaningful performance advantage.

The Intel Core 5 211TE does not win any benchmark comparisons. However, it offers features that the Ultra 5 lacks: ECC memory support, integrated graphics, DDR4 compatibility, and a lower launch MSRP of $221 versus $231. The 211TE also has a lower TDP of 45 watts compared to 65 watts for the Ultra 5.

For scenarios that require ECC memory for data integrity, integrated graphics for systems without a discrete GPU, or DDR4 memory for compatibility with existing components, the 211TE has a functional role despite its performance deficit. For any workload where compute throughput is the primary concern, the recorded data shows the Ultra 5 225F as the clear choice. Its 85th percentile ranking versus the 69th percentile ranking of the 211TE places it in a different performance tier entirely.