Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison
Intel Core 5 221E
Core 7 350
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core 7 350
Where Each One Wins
The benchmark split between the Intel Core 5 221E and the Intel Core 7 350 is unusually one-sided. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Core 5 221E claims victory in every single one. The Core 7 350 does not post a single winning score in any measured workload. This is not a close contest where each chip takes a few specialties; the data indicates a total sweep for the desktop-oriented Bartlett Lake part.
The largest gaps appear in heavily parallel workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 221E scores 25933 against 8030 for the Core 7 350, a delta of 223%. PassMark integer math shows an even starker division: 117813 versus 33734, a 249.2% advantage. These are workloads where core count and thread count dominate, and the Core 5 221E brings 14 cores and 20 threads to the table, while the Core 7 350 offers only 6 cores and 6 threads. The result is predictable: the Core 5 221E is built for sustained throughput, and the numbers confirm it.
Single-thread performance tells a different story. In PassMark single-thread, the Core 5 221E scores 4147 and the Core 7 350 scores 4100, a mere 1.1% difference. This is the closest margin in the entire comparison. The Core 7 350's 4.80 GHz boost clock, paired with a 3 nm process node, keeps it competitive in lightly threaded tasks despite its much lower base clock of 1.50 GHz. The Core 5 221E still wins, but only marginally. That narrow gap suggests the Wildcat Lake architecture has strong single-core efficiency, even if it cannot match the raw multi-core output of the Bartlett Lake chip.
Cinebench R20 single-core shows a wider gap: 1537 versus 758, a 102.8% delta. This is an odd divergence from the PassMark single-thread result. The Cinebench R20 single-core test appears to favor the Core 5 221E's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz far more than PassMark's single-thread test does. The data implies that the Core 5 221E's single-core advantage is workload-dependent, small in some tests but large in others.
Intermediate workloads fall in between. PassMark floating point math shows a 84.6% delta (79028 versus 42809), while PassMark data compression shows a 126.6% delta (324285 versus 143123). The Core 5 221E's larger L3 cache, 24 MB shared versus 6 MB shared, likely contributes to its compression and encryption advantages. PassMark data encryption shows a 75.7% delta (19205 versus 10933). The Core 7 350's smaller cache and single-channel memory bus, with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core 5 221E, constrain its performance in memory-sensitive tasks.
The Verdict
The recorded data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Core 5 221E is the stronger processor in nearly every measurable way. Its average benchmark score is 40144, placing it at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 350 averages 17779, at the 71st percentile. The gap in average score is substantial, more than double. The Core 5 221E also sits among much faster company in its nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 at 40081 (0.2% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40246 (-0.3% delta). The Core 7 350, by contrast, is grouped with the Intel Core 5 221TE at 17860 (-0.5% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (-0.6% delta). This is a different performance class entirely.
Who should pick the Core 5 221E? The benchmark results indicate it is the choice for anyone running multi-threaded desktop workloads: rendering, compiling, data compression, or any task that scales with cores. Its 14 cores, 20 threads, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache give it a decisive edge in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it more than triples the Core 7 350's score. It also supports ECC memory, which matters for reliability-focused desktop builds. Its launch MSRP is $232.
Who should pick the Core 7 350? The data does not support it as a performance pick. Its only near-win is PassMark single-thread, where it trails by 1.1%. It is a mobile part, soldered to BGA 1516, with a 15 W TDP, and it uses a 3 nm process. The integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, which may be more capable than the UHD Graphics 730 in the Core 5 221E, but the database does not include graphics benchmarks to confirm this. Its launch MSRP is $469. The price alone, combined with the lower benchmark scores, makes it difficult to justify from a pure computing standpoint. The Core 7 350 is a low-power mobile chip, and the numbers reflect that positioning, but they do not make a case for it over the Core 5 221E in any measured workload.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The largest single win for the Core 5 221E is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 117813 against 33734, a delta of 249.2%. This is more than triple the Core 7 350's output. Integer math is a proxy for general-purpose compute, and the result shows how far behind the 6-core, 6-thread Wildcat Lake part falls when all cores are engaged.
Cinebench R23 multi-core is the second-largest margin: 25933 versus 8030, a 223% delta. This test scales with both cores and sustained power delivery, and the Core 5 221E's 65 W TDP gives it far more headroom than the Core 7 350's 15 W TDP. The Core 7 350's 6 MB L3 cache and single-channel memory bus further handicap it in this workload.
PassMark data compression shows a 126.6% delta (324285 versus 143123). Compression workloads are memory-bandwidth sensitive, and the Core 5 221E's dual-channel 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is a significant advantage over the Core 7 350's single-channel 59.7 GB/s. The L3 cache difference, 24 MB versus 6 MB, also helps keep more working data on-die.
PassMark random string sorting shows a 118.6% delta (37686 versus 17238). This is another memory-latency-sensitive test, and again the Core 5 221E's larger cache and dual-channel memory bus deliver.
Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 102.7% delta (10891 versus 5373), and PassMark multithread shows a 101.1% delta (30510 versus 15170). Both tests confirm the multi-core trend.
Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 102.8% delta (1537 versus 758), which is surprisingly large for a single-threaded test. The Core 5 221E's 5.20 GHz boost clock likely drives this result, as the Core 7 350's 4.80 GHz boost cannot compensate in this particular workload.
Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 26% delta (368 versus 292), and Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 78.9% delta (3661 versus 2046). These two results are inconsistent with each other in magnitude, suggesting that the Core 7 350's single-core performance varies widely depending on the benchmark's instruction mix and duration.
The closest result is PassMark single-thread: 4147 versus 4100, a 1.1% delta. This is the only test where the Core 7 350 comes within striking distance. The 3 nm process and efficient Wildcat Lake cores nearly match the Core 5 221E in this specific metric, but the 221E still edges ahead.
FAQ
Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core 5 221E leads in both counts.
Q: What is the performance gap in Cinebench R23 multi-core?
A: The Core 5 221E scores 25933, while the Core 7 350 scores 8030. The Core 5 221E leads by 223%.
Q: Is the Core 7 350 competitive in single-threaded tasks?
A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core 7 350 scores 4100, nearly matching the Core 5 221E's 4147, a 1.1% gap. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 5 221E leads by 78.9% (3661 versus 2046), so the result depends on the benchmark.
Q: How do their memory systems differ?
A: The Core 5 221E supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 221E also supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 350 does not.
Q: What are their process nodes and sockets?
A: The Core 5 221E uses a 10 nm process and fits Intel Socket 1700. The Core 7 350 uses a 3 nm process and fits Intel BGA 1516.
Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?
A: The Core 5 221E has an average benchmark score of 40144, and the Core 7 350 has an average benchmark score of 17779. The Core 5 221E ranks at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 7 350 ranks at the 71st percentile.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Core 5 221E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core 7 350 uses Wildcat Lake. They are built on different process nodes: 10 nm for Bartlett Lake, 3 nm for Wildcat Lake. The 3 nm node gives the Core 7 350 a transistor-density advantage, but the benchmark data shows that advantage does not translate into higher performance in the recorded tests.
The core configurations are fundamentally different. The Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores. The Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyper-threading, which is unusual for a modern Intel part. The L1 cache also differs: 80 KB per core for the Core 5 221E, 192 KB per core for the Core 7 350. The L2 cache is 2 MB per core for the Core 5 221E and 2.5 MB per core for the Core 7 350. The shared L3 cache, however, heavily favors the Core 5 221E: 24 MB versus 6 MB.
Memory support diverges as well. The Core 5 221E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The memory bus is dual-channel on the Core 5 221E and single-channel on the Core 7 350. Bandwidth follows: 89.6 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the Core 5 221E.
PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 5 221E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core 7 350 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes. This gives the desktop part a massive expansion and bandwidth advantage.
Integrated graphics are different as well. The Core 5 221E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so direct comparison is not possible from the recorded data.
Specification Differences
The Intel Core 5 221E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Core 7 350 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 5 221E boosts higher, but the Core 7 350's lower base clock reflects its mobile, low-power design.
TDP differs sharply: 65 W for the Core 5 221E, 15 W for the Core 7 350. This makes the Core 7 350 far more power-efficient on paper, though the benchmark data shows it also delivers far less performance.
Sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 221E uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. The Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile package.
Memory support: the Core 5 221E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. ECC is available only on the Core 5 221E.
PCIe: the Core 5 221E offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core 7 350 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes.
Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 221E, Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores on the Core 7 350.
The Core 5 221E has a die size of 257 mm². The die size for the Core 7 350 is not recorded in the database.
The Core 5 221E has a launch MSRP of $232. The Core 7 350 has a launch MSRP of $469.
The Core 5 221E was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core 7 350 was released on 2026-04-15. The Core 5 221E has part number SRQDVQ659, and the Core 7 350 has part number SAE3F. Both are active production parts with locked multipliers.