Intel Core 5 211TE vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

The Intel Core 5 211TE and the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H occupy different corners of the product stack, yet the benchmark data reveals a stark performance gap. The Core Ultra X7 368H, a mobile processor built on a newer node, dominates every recorded workload. The Core 5 211TE, a desktop part, offers a different set of platform features, but the performance differential is substantial.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Core Ultra X7 368H wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28,221 against the Core 5 211TE's 12,201, a delta of -56.8% for the desktop part. The single-core Cinebench R23 result mirrors this, with the Core Ultra X7 368H scoring 3,984 versus 1,722, also a -56.8% delta.

The gap widens in several Passmark subtests. In floating point math, the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 105,681 compared to 26,150 for the Core 5 211TE, a -75.3% delta. Integer math shows a similar trend: 88,083 versus 33,991, a -61.4% delta. The largest single delta appears in the find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 321 against 72, a -77.6% difference.

Data compression results show the Core Ultra X7 368H at 312,927, while the Core 5 211TE manages 133,434, a -57.4% delta. Data encryption favors the mobile part heavily: 25,228 versus 7,231, a -71.3% delta. Extended instructions testing sees the Core Ultra X7 368H score 25,669 against 8,615, a -66.4% delta.

The multi-threaded Passmark score places the Core Ultra X7 368H at 32,956, with the Core 5 211TE at 11,685, a -64.5% delta. Physics calculations also favor the mobile chip: 2,857 versus 1,278, a -55.3% delta. Random string sorting results show 38,093 for the Core Ultra X7 368H and 14,838 for the Core 5 211TE, a -61% delta. Single-thread performance, recorded twice in the database, shows the Core Ultra X7 368H at 4,005 versus 1,408, a -64.8% delta in both entries.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design families. The Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Core Ultra X7 368H uses the Panther Lake architecture, specifically Panther Lake-H, and is fabricated on a 3 nm process, also at Intel. The process node shrink is a major factor in the performance and efficiency differences.

The Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading despite having more physical cores. The desktop part's base clock is 1.70 GHz with a boost of 4.80 GHz. The mobile part runs at a 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Core 5 211TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra X7 368H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The mobile chip's larger per-core cache helps feed its higher core count.

Memory support is a key differentiator. The Core 5 211TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. It also supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra X7 368H supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth, double the desktop part. It does not support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 5 211TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 5 211TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra X7 368H uses Arc B390.

The Core 5 211TE fits the Intel Socket 1700 platform with a 45 W TDP. The Core Ultra X7 368H is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2540 with a 25 W TDP. The desktop part has a die size of 215 mm², while the mobile part's die size is not recorded. The Core 5 211TE has a launch MSRP of $221; the Core Ultra X7 368H has no recorded launch MSRP. The Core 5 211TE was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core Ultra X7 368H has a release date of 2026-01-04.

The Verdict

The data shows that the Core Ultra X7 368H is the stronger processor in every benchmark category recorded. Its average benchmark score is 40,518, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 211TE averages 15,370, sitting in the 69th percentile. The nearest rival for the Core Ultra X7 368H is the Intel Core 7 253PE with a delta of -0.1%, indicating closely matched performance. The Core 5 211TE's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 7543 with a delta of -0.7%.

Given the consistent wins, the Core Ultra X7 368H is the choice for workloads that demand high throughput and fast single-thread performance, such as rendering, compilation, and data processing. The Core 5 211TE, while slower, offers a desktop socket, ECC memory support, and broader memory compatibility. The choice depends on platform requirements rather than raw performance. The mobile part is faster, but the desktop part is the only one of the two that fits a Socket 1700 motherboard and accepts both DDR4 and DDR5.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads; the Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.70 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.80 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. TDP differs sharply: 45 W for the desktop part versus 25 W for the mobile part.

Socket and form factor separate them completely. The Core 5 211TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra X7 368H uses Intel BGA 2540. Process nodes are 10 nm and 3 nm respectively. L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core. L3 cache is 20 MB shared versus 18 MB shared.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the desktop part, LPDDR5X only for the mobile part. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s. ECC support exists on the Core 5 211TE but not on the Core Ultra X7 368H. PCIe lanes from the CPU are 16 for the desktop part and 4 for the mobile part. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc B390. The Core 5 211TE has a 215 mm² die size; the Core Ultra X7 368H has no recorded die size. The generation labels also differ: Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) versus Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28,221 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, compared to 12,201 for the Intel Core 5 211TE, a -56.8% delta.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 211TE supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H supports LPDDR5X only.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40,518, while the Intel Core 5 211TE averages 15,370.

Q: What are the process nodes for these processors?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE is built on a 10 nm process. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is built on a 3 nm process.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes from the CPU?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra X7 368H wins in every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is determined by platform and feature requirements rather than performance. The Core Ultra X7 368H is the faster chip for CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific computation, and any task that uses the extended instruction set. Its higher single-thread score of 4,005 and multi-thread score of 32,956 indicate strong performance in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded applications. It also offers double the memory bandwidth at 153.6 GB/s, which benefits memory-intensive operations. Its integrated Arc B390 graphics are a more capable iGPU solution than the UHD Graphics 730.

The Core 5 211TE wins on platform flexibility. It uses the desktop Socket 1700, which accepts standard desktop motherboards and cooling solutions. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, allowing builders to use existing DDR4 modules. It includes ECC memory support, which is relevant for error-sensitive workloads such as file servers or certain compute tasks. It provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, which is more expansion headroom for discrete GPUs or NVMe storage than the 4 lanes on the mobile part. The Core 5 211TE also has a recorded launch MSRP of $221, giving it a defined price point in the database.

For a mobile system where power efficiency and raw speed matter, the Core Ultra X7 368H is clearly the better part. It delivers roughly double to quadruple the performance in most tests while consuming a 25 W TDP compared to 45 W. For a desktop build that requires ECC, DDR4 compatibility, or a specific socket, the Core 5 211TE is the only option between these two. The benchmark data does not show a single test where the Core 5 211TE outperforms the Core Ultra X7 368H, so any decision for the desktop part must be based on its unique platform attributes.