Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 211TE and Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL represent two very different design philosophies from Intel, and the recorded data shows a stark contrast in their benchmark profiles. The Core 5 211TE is a Bartlett Lake desktop part with 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL is a Meteor Lake-PS part with 12 cores and 14 threads. The benchmark database contains a complete set of measurements for the Core 5 211TE across Cinebench and Passmark suites, whereas the Core Ultra 7 165UL has no recorded benchmark scores at all. This absence is itself informative: the database shows the Core 5 211TE with an average benchmark score of 15370, placing it in the 69th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero due to missing data.

The Core 5 211TE delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12201 and a single-core score of 1722. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5124 multi-core and 723 single-core. The R15 results show 1229 multi-core and 173 single-core. These scores position the chip well within the upper half of the database, and the nearest rival comparisons confirm this standing. The AMD EPYC 7543, a server-class processor with an average score of 15477, trails the Core 5 211TE by only 0.7%, which is statistically negligible. The AMD EPYC 7702P scores 15130, putting the Core 5 211TE ahead by 1.6%. The AMD Ryzen 3 7440U scores 15682, which beats the Core 5 211TE by 2%. The Intel Core i3-1315U scores 15022, leaving the Core 5 211TE ahead by 2.3%.

Passmark results for the Core 5 211TE further illustrate its strengths. The multi-thread score is 11685, single-thread is 1408, integer math reaches 33991, and floating-point math hits 26150. Data compression scores 133434, data encryption scores 7231, and extended instructions score 8615. Random string sorting finishes at 14838, physics at 1278, and prime number finding at 72. These are substantial numbers for a 45-watt desktop processor, and they demonstrate a balanced design that handles both integer and floating-point workloads effectively.

The Core Ultra 7 165UL, by contrast, has no scores in the database for any benchmark. The head-to-head comparison table is empty, and the wins counter shows zero for both parts. This means the data cannot establish a direct performance relationship between these two specific chips. What can be established is the architectural context: the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses a 12-core, 14-thread configuration with a 15-watt TDP, whereas the Core 5 211TE uses 10 cores, 16 threads, and a 45-watt TDP. The Core Ultra 7 165UL boosts to 4.90 GHz, slightly higher than the Core 5 211TE's 4.80 GHz, but the Core 5 211TE's thread count advantage of 16 versus 14 suggests a different scheduling and workload distribution model.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Core 5 211TE is the only part with measurable wins. It wins in every benchmark category where data exists, because the Core Ultra 7 165UL has no recorded scores. The Core 5 211TE's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12201 indicates strong sustained all-core throughput, which suits rendering, compilation, and other parallel workloads. Its single-core score of 1722 in the same suite shows respectable per-thread performance, important for lightly threaded applications and general responsiveness.

The Passmark suite breaks down the Core 5 211TE's capabilities into specific domains. Integer math at 33991 and floating-point math at 26150 show a clear bias toward integer operations, which is typical for general productivity and database workloads. Data compression at 133434 and encryption at 7231 suggest the chip handles compression tasks efficiently while encryption remains a secondary strength. Extended instructions at 8615 and random string sorting at 14838 indicate solid performance in specialized instruction paths and sorting algorithms. The physics score of 1278 is modest, reflecting the integrated UHD Graphics 730 rather than a discrete GPU, but for a desktop part with a 45-watt TDP, this is expected.

The Core Ultra 7 165UL cannot claim wins in any category because the database contains no measurements. Its 12-core, 14-thread configuration with a 15-watt TDP suggests an efficiency-oriented design, but without scores, any performance assertion would be speculation. The database records its memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s, which is higher than the Core 5 211TE's 76.8 GB/s, and its PCIe implementation is Gen 4 with 8 lanes versus Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the Core 5 211TE. These are architectural facts, not performance results, and they point to different use cases rather than direct competition.

In terms of percentile standing, the Core 5 211TE at the 69th percentile of all CPUs is a clear data point. The Core Ultra 7 165UL at the 50th percentile, with an average score of zero, reflects missing data rather than a measured performance level. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 211TE are all within a narrow 2.3% band, indicating that the chip sits in a crowded performance tier where small architectural differences separate competitors.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion: the Intel Core 5 211TE is the part with measurable performance, and it performs competitively against the server-class and mobile chips in its nearest rival group. Its average benchmark score of 15370 places it within 2% of the AMD EPYC 7543, AMD Ryzen 3 7440U, and AMD EPYC 7702P, and it leads the Intel Core i3-1315U by 2.3%. These margins are small, but they establish the Core 5 211TE as a legitimate performer in its tier.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL has no benchmark data, so no performance verdict can be rendered from the database. Its launch MSRP is $447, and it uses a 7 nm process node with 12 cores and 14 threads. The Core 5 211TE has a launch MSRP of $221, uses a 10 nm process node, and delivers 10 cores and 16 threads. The Core 5 211TE also supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL does not, and the Core 5 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700 while the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses Intel Socket 1851.

For users prioritizing measured performance, the Core 5 211TE is the only choice with recorded results. For users prioritizing efficiency, the Core Ultra 7 165UL's 15-watt TDP versus 45-watt TDP is a clear differentiator, but the lack of scores means the database cannot confirm whether that efficiency translates into competitive performance. The Core 5 211TE's 69th percentile standing and its narrow margins against EPYC server chips suggest it is a capable desktop processor for multi-threaded workloads, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL remains an unmeasured quantity.

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread count difference between the two CPUs?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL has 12 cores and 14 threads.

Q: How do their clock speeds compare?

A: Both have a base clock of 1.70 GHz. The Core 5 211TE boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL boosts to 4.90 GHz.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The Core 5 211TE has a TDP of 45 watts. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Do either of these chips support ECC memory?

A: The Core 5 211TE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 165UL does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each processor?

A: The Core 5 211TE has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: What benchmark scores are available for the Core Ultra 7 165UL?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero, and it has no nearest rivals listed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in architecture. The Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, a 10 nm process node from Intel's foundry, with a die size of 215 mm². It uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel bus. The Core Ultra 7 165UL uses the Meteor Lake-PS architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake codename, on a 7 nm process node from Intel. Its die size is not recorded. It uses Intel Socket 1851 and supports DDR5 memory, with the database noting that memory support depends on the motherboard.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 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 Core Ultra 7 165UL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3 cache. This means the Core 5 211TE has a larger total L3 pool, which benefits workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which can improve per-thread latency.

PCIe support also differs. The Core 5 211TE provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. This gives the Core 5 211TE a significant advantage in raw I/O bandwidth for devices like GPUs and NVMe storage. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 5 211TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses Arc Xe-LPG 64EU, which is a more modern GPU architecture.

The Core 5 211TE was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL was released on 2024-04-07. The Core 5 211TE has a part number of SRQDL, and the Core Ultra 7 165UL has a part number of SRN95. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The production status for both is listed as active. The Core Ultra 7 165UL belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 generation, while the Core 5 211TE belongs to the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. These architectural differences explain why the two chips target different market segments: the Core 5 211TE is a desktop part with higher TDP and PCIe Gen 5, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL is a lower-power desktop part with a more modern process node and different cache hierarchy.