Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a remarkably one-sided comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core 5 211TE trailing by substantial margins in every category. The narrowest gap appears in PassMark physics, where the 245KF scores 2998 against 1278 for the 211TE, a delta of -57.4%. Even this closest result still represents a massive performance gulf.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent dominance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 245KF scores 36647 against 12201, a -66.7% delta. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 5173 versus 1722, also -66.7%. This consistency across all three Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The multi-core deltas remain at -66.7% throughout, while single-core deltas hover between -66.7% and -66.8%.

PassMark results reveal even larger disparities in specific workloads. The widest gap appears in prime number finding, where the 245KF scores 416 versus just 72 for the 211TE, a -82.7% delta. Floating-point math shows a -80.1% difference (131546 versus 26150), and extended instructions trail by -77.3% (37912 versus 8615). Data encryption shows a -78.3% delta (33381 versus 7231), while random string sorting sits at -73.1% (55206 versus 14838).

The multi-threaded PassMark score favors the 245KF at 43110 versus 11685, a -72.9% delta. Data compression shows 460123 versus 133434, a -71% difference. Single-thread performance in PassMark lands at 4715 versus 1408, a -70.1% delta. Integer math shows the second-smallest gap at -65.6% (98854 versus 33991), though this still represents nearly triple the performance.

Interestingly, the 211TE's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD EPYC 7543 (-0.7% delta), AMD Ryzen 3 7440U (-2% delta), AMD EPYC 7702P (+1.6% delta), and Intel Core i3-1315U (+2.3% delta). Its 69th percentile ranking places it among mid-range desktop processors. The 245KF, by contrast, sits at the 91st percentile with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (+0.6% delta), Intel Core 7 253PQE (-1.5% delta), Intel Core i9-14900HX (-1.6% delta), and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (+1.9% delta). The average benchmark scores tell the story: 55093 for the 245KF versus 15370 for the 211TE, a 3.6x overall difference.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF belongs to an entirely different performance class, with its average benchmark score of 55093 placing it among high-end desktop processors. The 211TE's 15370 average score and 69th percentile ranking position it as a mainstream part, suitable for general computing but not demanding workloads.

From the recorded measurements, the 245KF is the choice for users who need maximum throughput in multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, or floating-point calculations. Its 36647 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 43110 PassMark multi-thread score indicate strong parallel processing capability. The 211TE, with its 45 TDP and integrated UHD Graphics 730, serves a different purpose entirely, offering a lower-power platform with onboard graphics for systems that do not require discrete GPUs.

However, the 245KF has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A, which means it requires a discrete graphics card for any display output. The 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730, enabling basic display functionality without additional hardware. This distinction matters for certain system configurations.

The 211TE's 69th percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database shows it is not a weak processor in absolute terms; it outperforms roughly two-thirds of recorded parts. But against the 245KF's 91st percentile, the gap is undeniable. Users prioritizing raw computational speed should choose the 245KF. Users building power-conscious systems with integrated graphics needs would select the 211TE, accepting the significant performance tradeoff documented in these benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 211TE reaches 4.80 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The 211TE supports ECC memory (true), while the 245KF does not (false).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The 245KF provides 102.4 GB/s, while the 211TE provides 76.8 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads. The 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. The 211TE has more threads despite fewer cores.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The 245KF has an unlocked multiplier (true), while the 211TE does not (false).

Q: What sockets do these processors use?

A: The 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the 245KF uses Intel Socket 1851.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: 1.70 GHz for the 211TE versus 4.20 GHz for the 245KF. Boost clocks reach 4.80 GHz and 5.20 GHz respectively.

Thermal design power shows a 80-watt gap: 45 TDP for the 211TE versus 125 TDP for the 245KF. The 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the 245KF supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth favors the 245KF at 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. PCIe configurations differ as well: the 211TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 245KF provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

The 211TE includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, while the 245KF has no integrated graphics (N/A). The 211TE supports ECC memory; the 245KF does not. The multiplier is unlocked on the 245KF but locked on the 211TE. Launch MSRP: the 211TE launched at $221, and the 245KF launched at $294. Release dates differ: the 211TE released on 2025-01-12, while the 245KF released earlier on 2024-10-23. Part numbers are SRQDL for the 211TE and SRQCY for the 245KF.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is substantial. The 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename with a 10 nm process node manufactured by Intel. Its die size measures 215 mm². The 245KF uses the Arrow Lake-S codename with a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC. Its die size measures 243 mm², with 17,800 million transistors recorded.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The 211TE provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The 245KF provides 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. These cache increases align with the 245KF's higher core count and newer architecture.

The 211TE belongs to the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation, while the 245KF belongs to the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation and the Core Ultra Series 2 product line. The 245KF's 3 nm process from TSMC represents a newer manufacturing technology compared to the 211TE's 10 nm Intel process. This process advantage, combined with higher clocks and more cores, explains the consistent benchmark dominance.

The 245KF's lack of integrated graphics reflects its positioning as a high-performance part designed for systems with discrete GPUs. The 211TE's integrated graphics make it a self-contained solution for basic computing needs. The 245KF also includes an unlocked multiplier, indicating overclocking headroom, while the 211TE remains locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins in every measured benchmark category, making the use-case split straightforward from the data. It dominates multi-threaded workloads: Cinebench R23 multi-core (36647 versus 12201), PassMark multi-thread (43110 versus 11685), and PassMark data compression (460123 versus 133434). These results indicate strong suitability for video rendering, 3D modeling, data processing, and other heavily parallel tasks.

The 245KF also excels in single-thread performance, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 5173 versus 1722 and PassMark single-thread at 4715 versus 1408. This suggests responsiveness in everyday applications and strong performance in lightly threaded software. Its floating-point math score (131546 versus 26150) points to scientific computing and numerical simulation capability. The data encryption result (33381 versus 7231) indicates faster cryptographic operations.

The Intel Core 5 211TE, despite losing all head-to-head tests, holds advantages in specific areas not measured by raw performance. Its 45 TDP represents significantly lower power consumption than the 245KF's 125 TDP, making it suitable for compact or energy-conscious builds. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU, reducing system cost and complexity for basic display tasks. ECC memory support enables error-correcting memory configurations, valuable for certain professional or server-like workloads. The dual memory support (DDR4 and DDR5) offers platform flexibility that the 245KF's DDR5-only support does not provide.

The 211TE's 69th percentile ranking and 15370 average benchmark score show it remains competitive within its own class, comparable to the AMD EPYC 7543 and AMD Ryzen 3 7440U according to nearest rival data. The 245KF's 91st percentile and 55093 average score place it alongside the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and Intel Core i9-14900HX. Users needing maximum computational throughput should select the 245KF. Users prioritizing power efficiency, integrated graphics, or ECC support would choose the 211TE, accepting the documented performance tradeoffs.