Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX wins every single recorded test against the Intel Core 5 211TE, 17 out of 17 comparisons. The margins are substantial across all workloads, from single-threaded tasks to heavily parallel compute.

Starting with Cinebench, the gap is consistent at roughly 70% in favor of the Core Ultra 7 265HX. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 40,642 against 12,201 for the Core 5, a 70% deficit for the latter. The single-core R23 result shows the same pattern: 5,737 versus 1,722, also a 70% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 17,069 for the Ultra 7 versus 5,124 for the Core 5, while R20 single-core shows 2,409 against 723. The oldest test in the set, Cinebench R15, follows suit with multi-core scores of 4,096 and 1,229 and single-core scores of 578 and 173.

The Passmark suite reveals where the largest deltas appear. The biggest single gap is in floating-point math, where the Ultra 7 scores 161,605 and the Core 5 scores 26,150, a deficit of 83.8%. Prime number finding shows an 82.3% gap, with scores of 406 and 72. Data encryption shows an 81.7% difference, 39,472 versus 7,231. Extended instructions follow at 78.9%, with 40,741 against 8,615. Random string sorting shows a 76.2% gap, 62,458 versus 14,838.

The multi-threaded Passmark score of 47,985 for the Ultra 7 versus 11,685 for the Core 5 represents a 75.6% deficit. Data compression shows a 73.9% gap, 511,817 versus 133,434. Integer math shows a 73.2% difference, 126,954 versus 33,991. Single-thread performance, as measured by Passmark, delivers 4,500 for the Ultra 7 versus 1,408 for the Core 5, a 68.7% gap. The smallest margin in the entire dataset is in the physics test, where the Ultra 7 leads with 2,978 against 1,278, a 57.1% deficit.

The average benchmark score across all tests reinforces the hierarchy: the Core Ultra 7 265HX averages 63,173, while the Core 5 211TE averages 15,370. That places the Ultra 7 in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 sits in the 69th percentile.

For context on the Core 5 211TE, its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD EPYC 7543, which scores 15,477 (0.7% higher), the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U at 15,682 (2% higher), the AMD EPYC 7702P at 15,130 (1.6% lower), and the Intel Core i3-1315U at 15,022 (2.3% lower). The Core 5 sits right in the middle of that group.

The Core Ultra 7 265HX, by contrast, sits among much faster company. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13790F at 63,080 (0.1% lower), followed by the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G at 63,331 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 at 62,839 (0.5% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX at 62,738 (0.7% lower). The 265HX leads all four by small margins.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX is the superior processor in every measured category. Anyone selecting between these two parts based on the recorded benchmarks should choose the Ultra 7, provided the platform constraints allow it.

The Core 5 211TE is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with 10 cores and 16 threads, a 45 W TDP, and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 265HX is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114 with 20 cores and 20 threads, a 55 W TDP, and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The Ultra 7 doubles the core count, offers a higher boost clock, and still delivers over three times the average benchmark score.

The percentile ranking tells the same story. The Ultra 7 sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 sits at the 69th percentile. That is a 24-percentile-point separation, a meaningful gap in overall performance tier.

The launch MSRP for the Core 5 211TE is $221. The Core Ultra 7 265HX has no recorded launch MSRP in the database, so no direct price comparison is possible.

The only scenario where the Core 5 211TE makes sense is where the user is locked into the LGA 1700 platform or requires ECC memory support, which the Core 5 offers and the Ultra 7 does not. But from a pure performance standpoint, the Ultra 7 wins outright.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 265HX wins in every benchmark category. There are no tests in the database where the Core 5 211TE takes a lead. The margin analysis shows the Ultra 7's dominance is broad, but the size of the gap varies by workload type.

The largest advantages for the Ultra 7 appear in floating-point math (83.8% gap), prime number finding (82.3%), and data encryption (81.7%). These are compute-heavy workloads that scale with core count and per-core efficiency. The Ultra 7's 20 cores and 20 threads, built on a 3 nm TSMC process, provide a substantial advantage over the Core 5's 10 cores and 16 threads on Intel's 10 nm node.

The smallest gap is in physics (57.1%), though the Ultra 7 still wins decisively. This suggests the physics workload is somewhat less sensitive to the architectural differences between the two parts, but the Ultra 7's higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 4.80 GHz still carries it ahead.

For single-threaded tasks, the Passmark single-thread score shows a 68.7% gap, with the Ultra 7 at 4,500 and the Core 5 at 1,408. The Cinebench single-core results show a similar 70% gap across all three versions of the test. This indicates the Ultra 7's per-core performance is substantially stronger, not just its multi-core throughput.

The Core 5 211TE does have some features the Ultra 7 lacks. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 7 supports only DDR5. The Core 5 also supports ECC memory, which the Ultra 7 does not. The Core 5 uses a desktop socket (LGA 1700) and has a lower TDP of 45 W versus 55 W, which could matter for systems with strict thermal or power envelopes. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 5 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

But in terms of raw benchmark performance, the Ultra 7 has no competition from the Core 5 in this dataset.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 40,642 versus 12,201 for the Core 5 211TE, a 70% difference. The Passmark multi-thread score is 47,985 versus 11,685, a 75.6% gap.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The Ultra 7 leads in every single-core test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 5,737 versus 1,722, a 70% gap. Passmark single-thread shows 4,500 versus 1,408, a 68.7% gap.

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

A: The largest gap is in Passmark floating-point math, where the Ultra 7 scores 161,605 and the Core 5 scores 26,150, a deficit of 83.8% for the Core 5.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 5 211TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX supports DDR5 only. The Core 5 also supports ECC memory; the Ultra 7 does not.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: The Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Core Ultra 7 265HX has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265HX has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, while the Core 5 211TE has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The Core 5 211TE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm². It belongs to the Bartlett Lake generation, which is part of the Core 5 series. The Core Ultra 7 265HX is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114, built on TSMC's 3 nm process with a die size of 243 mm². It belongs to the Arrow Lake-HX generation, part of the Core Ultra Series 2.

The manufacturing difference is significant. The Core 5 uses Intel's 10 nm node with Intel as the foundry. The Ultra 7 uses TSMC's 3 nm node. The Ultra 7 also has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million, while the Core 5 has no transistor count recorded in the database. The die size difference is modest, 243 mm² versus 215 mm², but the transistor density on the 3 nm process is considerably higher.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 5 has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading is enabled on some cores. The Ultra 7 has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning no Hyper-Threading, but a full doubling of physical cores. The cache hierarchy reflects this: the Core 5 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3.

Memory bandwidth favors the Ultra 7. It supports dual-channel DDR5 with a recorded bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core 5 also uses dual-channel memory but supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Ultra 7's ECC support is absent, while the Core 5 supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 5 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 7 offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Both use the same PCIe generation, but the Ultra 7 has four additional lanes.

The integrated graphics are different tiers. The Core 5 uses UHD Graphics 730, a basic desktop iGPU. The Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, a more capable mobile graphics solution. The Ultra 7 also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 is locked.

The base clocks differ, with the Core 5 at 1.70 GHz and the Ultra 7 at 2.60 GHz. The boost clocks are 4.80 GHz and 5.30 GHz respectively. The TDP ratings are 45 W for the Core 5 and 55 W for the Ultra 7, though the actual power behavior in a mobile platform may vary.

Both processors were released on the same date, 2025-01-12, and both are listed as Active in production status. The Core 5 has a launch MSRP of $221; the Ultra 7 has no recorded launch MSRP. The market segments differ, with the Core 5 aimed at Desktop and the Ultra 7 at Mobile, which explains the socket and form factor differences.