Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H, which wins 16 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The Core 5 211TE claims only a single win, but that win is significant and reveals an interesting split in workload behavior.

The Core Ultra 7 255H dominates across nearly every measured category. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1515 against the Core 5's 1229, a delta of 18.9%. The single-core gap is even wider: 251 versus 173, a 31.1% advantage for the Ultra 7. Cinebench R20 shows a consistent 19.7% lead for the Ultra 7 in both multi-core (6381 vs 5124) and single-core (900 vs 723) tests. Cinebench R23 single-core continues the pattern, with the Ultra 7 ahead by 6.6% (1843 vs 1722).

The PassMark suite amplifies the Ultra 7's advantage. Data compression shows a 55.4% lead (298850 vs 133434), data encryption a 69.1% lead (23395 vs 7231), and extended instructions a 63.7% lead (23755 vs 8615). Floating point math delivers a 73.5% gap (98796 vs 26150), while integer math shows a 56.4% difference (77975 vs 33991). The find prime numbers test produces the largest proportional gap at 76.2% (303 vs 72). Multi-thread performance is 61.9% higher (30703 vs 11685), physics 43.3% higher (2254 vs 1278), and random string sorting 58.8% higher (36058 vs 14838). Single-thread results show a 67.4% lead (4317 vs 1408).

The single exception is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core 5 211TE delivers 12201 points versus the Ultra 7's 9240, a 32% advantage. This result contradicts the pattern seen in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core, where the Ultra 7 leads. The data suggests that the Core 5's sustained multi-core performance under the R23 workload exceeds what the Ultra 7 can maintain, likely related to their differing power envelopes and core configurations.

Overall average benchmark scores reinforce the Ultra 7's position. The Core Ultra 7 255H averages 33537 points, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 211TE averages 15370, landing in the 69th percentile. The nearest rivals list for the Ultra 7 includes the AMD Ryzen 5 240 at 33542 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at 33667 (-0.4%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX at 33668 (-0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-12600HX at 33375 (0.5%). The Core 5's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7543 at 15477 (-0.7%), the AMD EPYC 7702P at 15130 (1.6%), the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U at 15682 (-2%), and the Intel Core i3-1315U at 15022 (2.3%).

The Verdict

The benchmark data positions these two processors for entirely different environments. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is the clear performance leader, winning 94% of the head-to-head comparisons. Its 83rd percentile standing versus the Core 5's 69th percentile confirms a substantial performance tier gap. The average benchmark score of 33537 for the Ultra 7 is more than double the Core 5's 15370.

The Core 5 211TE does hold one notable advantage: Cinebench R23 multi-core performance. This single result indicates that in specific sustained multi-core workloads, the Core 5 can outperform the Ultra 7 by 32%. However, this isolated win does not compensate for the Ultra 7's dominance across the other 16 tests, many of which show the Ultra 7 leading by margins exceeding 50%.

The data indicates the Ultra 7 255H is the appropriate choice for workloads that benefit from high single-thread performance, encryption, compression, math operations, and general multi-threaded throughput. The Core 5 211TE appears better suited for scenarios specifically resembling the Cinebench R23 multi-core workload, where its 12201 score exceeds the Ultra 7's 9240.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins in every category except one. Its strengths are particularly pronounced in PassMark workloads: data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multi-threading, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. The Cinebench R15 and R20 tests also favor the Ultra 7 in both multi-core and single-core modes. Cinebench R23 single-core adds another win for the Ultra 7.

The Intel Core 5 211TE wins exclusively in Cinebench R23 multi-core. This result stands apart from the R15 and R20 multi-core results, where the Ultra 7 leads. The difference suggests that the R23 workload places demands on the processors that the R15 and R20 tests do not, and the Core 5's configuration responds better under those specific conditions.

For users whose primary workloads resemble Cinebench R23 multi-core rendering, the Core 5 211TE offers a measurable advantage. For virtually all other measured workloads, including general productivity, data processing, encryption, and math-heavy tasks, the Ultra 7 255H delivers superior results. The margin in the Ultra 7's favor is often substantial, frequently exceeding 50%, which indicates a decisive performance gap rather than a marginal one.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H averages 33537 points, while the Intel Core 5 211TE averages 15370 points.

Q: In which benchmark does the Intel Core 5 211TE outperform the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H?

A: The Core 5 211TE wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core with 12201 points versus the Ultra 7's 9240, a 32% advantage.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 7 255H leads by 76.2% (303 vs 72).

Q: How does the single-thread performance compare?

A: The Ultra 7 255H leads in single-thread tests across all benchmarks: Cinebench R15 (251 vs 173, 31.1%), R20 (900 vs 723, 19.7%), R23 (1843 vs 1722, 6.6%), and PassMark single-thread (4317 vs 1408, 67.4%).

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H ranks in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 5 211TE ranks in the 69th percentile.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmark wins does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins 16 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, and the Intel Core 5 211TE wins 1.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry and has a die size of 215 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-H codename, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, and is built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The Ultra 7's die size is not recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Core 5 relies on hyper-threading to reach 16 threads from 10 cores, while the Ultra 7 achieves 16 threads from 16 physical cores without hyper-threading.

Cache hierarchies also differ. 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 Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7's larger cache allocation per core and higher total L3 capacity contribute to its performance advantages in cache-sensitive workloads.

Clock speeds show the Ultra 7 with higher frequencies. The Core 5 211TE has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Ultra 7 255H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Ultra 7's higher boost clock aligns with its single-thread performance leads.

The market segments differ as well. The Core 5 211TE is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 7 255H is a mobile processor using Intel BGA 2049. The Core 5 has a TDP of 45 watts, whereas the Ultra 7 has a TDP of 28 watts, despite the Ultra 7 delivering higher performance in most tests.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 211TE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 7 255H includes Arc Graphics 140T. Both processors support ECC memory, but memory support types differ: the Core 5 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth also differs, with the Core 5 rated at 76.8 GB/s and the Ultra 7 at 102.4 GB/s.

PCIe lanes differ, with the Core 5 211TE offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only) and the Ultra 7 255H offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Both processors have locked multipliers. The Core 5 211TE has a launch MSRP of $221; the Ultra 7 255H has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two processors. Core count: 10 for the Core 5 211TE versus 16 for the Ultra 7 255H. Thread count: both have 16 threads. Base clock: 1.70 GHz for the Core 5 versus 2.00 GHz for the Ultra 7. Boost clock: 4.80 GHz for the Core 5 versus 5.10 GHz for the Ultra 7. TDP: 45 watts for the Core 5 versus 28 watts for the Ultra 7.

Socket type: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 versus Intel BGA 2049 for the Ultra 7. Codename: Bartlett Lake for the Core 5 versus Arrow Lake-H for the Ultra 7. Generation: Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) for the Core 5 versus Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H) for the Ultra 7. Process node: 10 nm for the Core 5 versus 3 nm for the Ultra 7. Foundry: Intel for the Core 5 versus TSMC for the Ultra 7.

Cache: L1 is 80 KB per core for the Core 5 versus 192 KB per core for the Ultra 7. L2 is 1.25 MB per core for the Core 5 versus 3 MB per core for the Ultra 7. L3 is 20 MB shared for the Core 5 versus 24 MB shared for the Ultra 7. Die size: 215 mm² for the Core 5, no recorded value for the Ultra 7.

Memory support: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 5 versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Ultra 7. Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 versus 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 7. PCIe: Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Core 5 versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes for the Ultra 7. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 5 versus Arc Graphics 140T for the Ultra 7.

Market segment: Desktop for the Core 5 versus Mobile for the Ultra 7. Part numbers: SRQDL for the Core 5 versus SRQAN for the Ultra 7. Launch MSRP: $221 for the Core 5, no recorded value for the Ultra 7. Both processors have a release date of 2025-01-12, are marked as Active in production, and are not multiplier unlocked.