Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores, the Intel Core 5 211TE or the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an average benchmark score of 79574, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 211TE has an average benchmark score of 15370, placing it in the 69th percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 4951 in PassMark single-thread, while the Intel Core 5 211TE scores 1408, a 71.6% advantage for the Core Ultra 9.

Q: Which processor uses a newer manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, whereas the Intel Core 5 211TE uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports only DDR5.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Core 5 211TE does not.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus across every test category. Out of 17 head-to-head comparisons, the Core Ultra 9 wins all of them, leaving the Intel Core 5 211TE with zero wins. The scale of the advantage varies significantly by workload, which reveals where each chip has relative strength.

The Intel Core 5 211TE is a desktop part with a 45 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a mobile processor with a 55 W TDP. Despite the mobile form factor, the Core Ultra 9 delivers dramatically higher throughput. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core Ultra 9 scores 5981 versus 1229, a 79.5% margin. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Core Ultra 9 scores 21198 against 5124, and in Cinebench R23 multicore, where it scores 39684 against 12201.

The single-core results tell a similar story, though the gap narrows. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 9 scores 2356 versus 1722 for the Core 5 211TE, a 26.9% advantage. This is the smallest delta in the entire dataset, indicating that the Core 5 211TE is relatively more competitive in lightly threaded workloads. The architecture differences, specifically the higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 versus 4.80 GHz on the Core 5 211TE, contribute to this result.

Memory bandwidth is another area of separation. The Core Ultra 9 supports 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Core 5 211TE supports 76.8 GB/s. This 25.6 GB/s difference helps explain why memory-sensitive workloads such as data compression and random string sorting show massive gaps. In PassMark data compression, the Core Ultra 9 scores 658724 versus 133434, and in random string sorting, it scores 80327 versus 14838.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Intel Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation.

The manufacturing processes differ substantially. The Core 5 211TE is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, with a die size of 215 mm². The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses a 3 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The Core 5 211TE has no listed transistor count in the database.

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 Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core caches and the 16 MB L3 advantage on the Core Ultra 9 support its higher throughput in cache-sensitive workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 211TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The memory support differs, with the Core 5 211TE accepting both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 accepts only DDR5. Both support ECC memory and dual-channel memory buses.

PCIe connectivity is not identical. The Core 5 211TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 9 also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 211TE is locked.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses Intel BGA 2114, a mobile socket. The market segments reflect this: the Core 5 211TE is a desktop processor, while the Core Ultra 9 is a mobile processor.

Specification Differences

The table below lists the fields where the two processors differ, based on the database records.

| Specification | Intel Core 5 211TE | Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Cores | 10 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base clock | 1.70 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh |

| Generation | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 215 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 20 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-03-16 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | Not listed |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part number | SRQDL | SADSS |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus with a commanding lead in every test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core Ultra 9 scores 5981 against 1229 for the Core 5 211TE, a 79.5% margin. In R15 single-core, the Core Ultra 9 scores 340 versus 173, a 49.1% margin. The R20 suite shows a 75.8% margin in both multicore and single-core, with scores of 21198 versus 5124 and 2992 versus 723 respectively. In R23 multicore, the Core Ultra 9 scores 39684 against 12201, a 69.3% margin. In R23 single-core, the gap narrows to 26.9%, with scores of 2356 versus 1722.

The PassMark suite amplifies the differences. In data compression, the Core Ultra 9 scores 658724 against 133434, a 79.7% margin. Data encryption shows the Core Ultra 9 at 50008 versus 7231, an 85.5% margin. Extended instructions show 51290 versus 8615, an 83.2% margin. Prime number finding shows 519 versus 72, an 86.1% margin. Floating point math shows 201773 versus 26150, an 87% margin. Integer math shows 164839 versus 33991, a 79.4% margin. Multithread shows 59439 versus 11685, an 80.3% margin. Physics shows 3387 versus 1278, a 62.3% margin. Random string sorting shows 80327 versus 14838, an 81.5% margin. Single-thread shows 4951 versus 1408, a 71.6% margin. The same single-thread result appears under the singlethread label.

The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus sits near the top of the database with a 95th percentile ranking. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900KF with a 0.3% higher average score, the AMD EPYC 7413 with a 0.6% lower average score, the Intel Core i9-14900K with a 0.6% lower average score, and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X with a 1.4% higher average score. The Core 5 211TE, in the 69th percentile, sits near the AMD EPYC 7543 with a 0.7% lower average score, the AMD EPYC 7702P with a 1.6% higher average score, the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U with a 2% lower average score, and the Intel Core i3-1315U with a 2.3% higher average score.

The data confirms that the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the dominant performer in every measured workload. The Core 5 211TE remains viable for desktop applications where its lower TDP and dual memory support matter, but in raw performance the recorded benchmarks show no overlap between the two.