Intel Core 5 211TE vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 211TE holds the substantial performance advantage in this comparison, backed by a complete benchmark suite, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Intel part delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,201 and a single-core score of 1,722, numbers that establish a clear performance baseline. The Snapdragon, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no measured results exist for direct comparison. This lack of data places the Qualcomm part at the 50th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel chip sits at the 69th percentile, indicating that even without head-to-head results, the Intel processor is positioned higher in the overall performance distribution.

The Intel Core 5 211TE shows consistent strength across PassMark workloads. Its integer math score of 33,991 and floating point math score of 26,150 demonstrate solid computational throughput for general-purpose tasks. Data compression reaches 133,434, while data encryption scores 7,231. Extended instructions, which matter for modern software optimized for newer CPU features, score 8,615. The multi-threaded PassMark score of 11,685 pairs with a single-thread score of 1,408, a gap that reflects the chip's 10 cores and 16 threads. Prime number finding scores a modest 72, and random string sorting reaches 14,838. Physics acceleration, a measure useful for simulation workloads, scores 1,278.

The Intel part's nearest rivals, as recorded in the database, provide context for its standing. The AMD EPYC 7543 averages 15,477, which is 0.7% higher than the Intel chip's average of 15,370. The AMD EPYC 7702P averages 15,130, putting it 1.6% behind the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen 3 7440U averages 15,682, or 2% ahead, while the Intel Core i3-1315U averages 15,022, sitting 2.3% behind. These deltas are narrow, showing that the Core 5 211TE competes directly with these server and mobile parts in aggregate benchmark performance, despite differences in core counts and market positioning.

The single-core Cinebench results for the Intel chip, R15 at 173, R20 at 723, and R23 at 1,722, show a scaling pattern consistent with its 4.80 GHz boost clock. Multi-core scaling from R15's 1,229 to R20's 5,124 and R23's 12,201 indicates strong thread utilization across its 16 threads. The Snapdragon X1P-26-100, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and no listed boost clock, has no such measurements in the database, leaving its performance profile undefined for direct comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in design philosophy. The Intel Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process node with a die size of 215 mm². It packs 10 cores and 16 threads, a configuration that enables simultaneous multithreading. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 uses the Oryon codename, fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process node, with 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning no multithreading per core. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 4 nm, gives the Qualcomm part a manufacturing density advantage, though the Intel chip counters with higher thread count and a larger shared cache.

Cache hierarchies differ markedly. The Intel part allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a 20 MB shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm part uses 288 KB of L1 per core, 12 MB of L2 per module, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel chip's larger L3, 20 MB versus 6 MB, benefits workloads with high working sets that fit in shared cache. The Qualcomm part's larger per-core L1, 288 KB versus 80 KB, may reduce latency for frequently accessed data, but its smaller L3 could hinder larger data sets.

Memory support further separates them. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory, a feature relevant for reliability-sensitive tasks. The Qualcomm part uses LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus, achieving a higher memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s, but it does not support ECC. The Snapdragon's bandwidth advantage, 135.2 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s, is significant for memory-bound operations, but the Intel part's ECC support appeals to users requiring error correction.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Intel chip provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Qualcomm chip offers Gen 4 with 12 lanes. The Intel part's PCIe Gen 5 support doubles the per-lane bandwidth of Gen 4, which matters for high-throughput devices like graphics cards and NVMe storage. Integrated graphics also differ: the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Qualcomm part uses Adreno X1-45. The Intel processor targets the desktop segment with an Intel Socket 1700, while the Qualcomm processor targets mobile with a Qualcomm BGA 2073 socket.

The Intel part draws a TDP of 45 watts, compared to the Qualcomm part's 25 watts. This power difference reflects the Intel chip's desktop orientation and higher thread count, while the Qualcomm chip's lower TDP suits mobile thermal constraints. The Intel part released on 2025-01-12, while the Qualcomm part released earlier on 2024-08-27. The Intel chip carries a launch MSRP of $221, while the Qualcomm part has no recorded launch MSRP. Both are active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core 5 211TE as the performance leader, purely because it has recorded measurements and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 does not. The Intel chip's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,201 and PassMark multi-thread score of 11,685 indicate strong parallel throughput, while its single-core R23 score of 1,722 shows capable single-thread performance. The Qualcomm part's lack of any benchmark scores in the database means there is no evidence of its performance level, so any selection between these two must rely on the Intel part's verified results.

The Intel chip's 69th percentile standing among all CPUs, versus the Qualcomm's 50th percentile, reinforces this conclusion. The Intel part's nearest rivals, all within 2.3% of its average score of 15,370, place it in a competitive tier that includes server processors like the AMD EPYC 7543 and the AMD EPYC 7702P. The Qualcomm part, with no nearest rivals and an average score of zero, has no such positioning. For users prioritizing measured performance, the Intel Core 5 211TE is the only option with data to support a choice.

The Qualcomm part does offer architectural advantages: a smaller 4 nm process node, higher memory bandwidth at 135.2 GB/s, and a lower TDP of 25 watts. These features suggest efficiency and memory throughput, but without benchmark scores, their real-world impact remains unquantified. The Intel part counters with ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, and a larger 20 MB L3 cache, all of which have documented relevance in desktop workloads.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has a recorded Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,722. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has no recorded Cinebench scores in the database.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE supports ECC memory. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has a memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s.

Q: How does the process node differ?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE uses a 10 nm process node from Intel. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has a TDP of 45 watts. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has a TDP of 25 watts.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 211TE wins in every measured benchmark category because it is the only processor with recorded scores. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,201 and PassMark integer math score of 33,991 indicate strength in CPU-intensive compute tasks like rendering, data processing, and scientific simulation. The PassMark data compression score of 133,434 points to efficiency in file archiving and compression workloads. The single-thread score of 1,408, combined with the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,722, shows that the Intel part handles single-threaded applications competently, though its multi-core advantage is larger.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 wins on architectural efficiency metrics that are documented without performance scores. Its 135.2 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds the Intel part's 76.8 GB/s, which could benefit memory-intensive workloads if the CPU can feed that bandwidth. Its 25 watt TDP, versus 45 watts for the Intel part, indicates lower power draw for mobile or compact systems. The 4 nm process node from TSMC suggests a denser, potentially more efficient transistor layout compared to Intel's 10 nm node. The larger per-core L1 cache of 288 KB, versus 80 KB, may reduce latency for some data access patterns.

For workloads where cache size matters, the Intel part's 20 MB shared L3 cache provides more space for shared data across all cores, while the Qualcomm part's 6 MB L3 is smaller but its 12 MB per-module L2 could help with per-core data locality. The Intel part's PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes supports higher-bandwidth peripherals, while the Qualcomm part's PCIe Gen 4 with 12 lanes offers a narrower but still capable interface. The Intel part's ECC memory support makes it suitable for error-sensitive computing, while the Qualcomm part's lack of ECC limits that use case.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 1.70 GHz for the Intel part and 3.00 GHz for the Qualcomm part. The Intel part has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the Qualcomm part has no listed boost clock. TDP is 45 watts for the Intel part and 25 watts for the Qualcomm part.

The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Qualcomm part uses Qualcomm BGA 2073. Process nodes are 10 nm for Intel and 4 nm for TSMC. The Intel die size is 215 mm², while the Qualcomm die size is not recorded. L1 cache is 80 KB per core for Intel and 288 KB per core for Qualcomm. L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core for Intel and 12 MB per module for Qualcomm. L3 cache is 20 MB shared for Intel and 6 MB shared for Qualcomm.

Memory support differs: Intel uses DDR4 and DDR5, while Qualcomm uses LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for Intel and 135.2 GB/s for Qualcomm. ECC memory is supported by Intel but not by Qualcomm. PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel and Gen 4 with 12 lanes for Qualcomm. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 for Intel and Adreno X1-45 for Qualcomm. Market segments are Desktop for Intel and Mobile for Qualcomm. Release dates are 2025-01-12 for Intel and 2024-08-27 for Qualcomm. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $221, while the Qualcomm part has none recorded. Both parts have locked multipliers, and neither has a recorded transistor count.