Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

Intel
INTEL

Intel Core 5 211E

CORE STATE Bartlett Lake
CORE SPECS 10 Cores / 16 Threads
CLOCK SPEED 2.7 Base / 4.9 GHz Turbo
CACHE 20 MB (shared)
MAX TDP 65W
ARCHITECTURE Bartlett Lake
nm
PROCESS 10 nm
LAUNCH DATE 2025
VS
Intel
INTEL

Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

CORE STATE Arrow Lake Refresh
CORE SPECS 24 Cores / 24 Threads
CLOCK SPEED 3.7 Base / 5.5 GHz Turbo
CACHE 36 MB (shared)
MAX TDP 125W
ARCHITECTURE Arrow Lake Refresh
nm
PROCESS 3 nm
LAUNCH DATE 2026

PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS

cinebench_cinebench_r15_multicore
2,055
6,656
cinebench_cinebench_r15_singlecore
289
354
cinebench_cinebench_r20_multicore
8,563
24,461
cinebench_cinebench_r20_singlecore
1,208
3,453
cinebench_cinebench_r23_multicore
20,389
44,253
cinebench_cinebench_r23_singlecore
2,878
2,439
passmark_data_compression
346,757
804,322
passmark_data_encryption
17,938
59,097
passmark_extended_instructions
21,592
63,506
passmark_find_prime_numbers
43
615
passmark_floating_point_math
66,402
229,491
passmark_integer_math
88,117
175,986
passmark_multithread
23,833
68,574
passmark_physics
702
4,064
passmark_random_string_sorting
34,308
96,945
passmark_single_thread
4,006
5,068
passmark_singlethread
4,006
5,068

Analysis: Intel Core 5 211E vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, which wins 16 of 17 recorded comparisons. The single exception is a notable one: the Intel Core 5 211E takes the Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 2878 against 2439, a 18% advantage. This is the only test where the Core 5 211E leads, and it is a meaningful result for lightly threaded workloads.

Every other multi-threaded and general workload benchmark falls to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, often by very large margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 44253 versus 20389, a 53.9% lead. The gap widens further in older Cinebench versions: R20 multi-core shows 24461 against 8563, a 65% difference, and R15 multi-core shows 6656 against 2055, a 69.1% difference. The pattern is consistent across the Passmark suite. Data compression results are 804322 versus 346757, a 56.9% advantage. Data encryption shows 59097 versus 17938, a 69.6% gap. Floating point math delivers 229491 versus 66402, a 71.1% lead. Integer math is closer, with 175986 versus 88117, a 49.9% advantage, but still a clear win.

The most extreme discrepancy appears in the prime number search test, where the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 615 versus 43, a 93% difference. This workload clearly favors the newer processor’s architecture and core count. Physics calculations also show a massive gap: 4064 versus 702, an 82.7% lead. Extended instructions score 63506 versus 21592, a 66% difference. Random string sorting results are 96945 versus 34308, a 64.6% gap. The multi-threaded Passmark score is 68574 versus 23833, a 65.2% lead. Single-threaded Passmark scores also favor the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, with 5068 versus 4006, a 21% advantage in both recorded instances of the test.

The average benchmark score reflects this dominance: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus records 93785, while the Core 5 211E records 37829. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, whereas the Core 5 211E is at the 86th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus include the Intel Xeon 6520P (0% delta), the AMD EPYC 4564P (-1.5%), the AMD EPYC 9175F (-1.9%), and the AMD EPYC 4565P (-2.1%). The Core 5 211E’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (0.1%), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 (0.2%), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (-0.2%), and the Intel Core i9-14901E (-0.2%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test with 2878 points against 2439, a 18% lead. However, in the Passmark single-thread tests, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus records 5068 versus 4006, a 21% advantage.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus leads by 53.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (44253 vs 20389) and by 65.2% in Passmark multi-thread (68574 vs 23833). The margins range from 49.9% in integer math to 93% in prime number search.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93785, while the Intel Core 5 211E has an average score of 37829. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus ranks at the 96th percentile, and the Core 5 211E ranks at the 86th percentile.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, compared to 4.90 GHz for the Intel Core 5 211E. The base clocks are 3.70 GHz and 2.70 GHz, respectively.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 5 211E and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus have ECC memory support enabled in the recorded data.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor in the database?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is closest to the Intel Xeon 6520P (0% delta), followed by the AMD EPYC 4564P (-1.5%). The Core 5 211E is closest to the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 (0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 (0.2%).

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a single conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the substantially faster processor in nearly every measurable workload. With 16 wins out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and an average score roughly 2.5 times higher, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the choice for anyone prioritizing throughput, multi-threaded rendering, encryption, or physics calculations. Its 96th percentile ranking places it among the top processors in the database, with rivals in the Xeon and EPYC class.

The Intel Core 5 211E, while losing the overall comparison, does hold a specific advantage in Cinebench R23 single-core. That 18% lead indicates a particular strength in legacy single-threaded rendering workloads. However, its Passmark single-thread score is 21% lower, which contradicts the Cinebench result. The Core 5 211E’s 86th percentile ranking and its rival set of Ryzen AI and Core i9 processors place it in a lower performance tier.

For users who need maximum multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the clear pick from the data. For users who specifically target Cinebench R23 single-core scores, the Core 5 211E offers a measurable advantage, but the overall benchmark record does not support a general recommendation for it over the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Intel Core 5 211E uses 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses 24 cores and 24 threads. The base clock is 2.70 GHz for the Core 5 211E and 3.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. The boost clock is 4.90 GHz versus 5.50 GHz. Thermal design power is 65 W for the Core 5 211E and 125 W for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.

Sockets differ: the Core 5 211E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 211E has a 257 mm² die size, and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a 243 mm² die size. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 211E does not. Memory support differs: the Core 5 211E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 5 211E and 115.2 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. PCIe lanes are 16 for the Core 5 211E and 20 for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, both Gen 5.

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 211E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The release dates are also different: the Core 5 211E launched on 2025-01-12, and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus launched on 2026-03-10. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 211E is $221, and for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus it is $299.

Architecture Differences

The architecture gap is significant. The Intel Core 5 211E is built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 17,800 million transistors, while the Core 5 211E has no recorded transistor count. The codenames reflect different design generations: Bartlett Lake for the Core 5 211E and Arrow Lake Refresh for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.

Cache hierarchies are substantially different. The Core 5 211E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 270K 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 nearly double L3 capacity on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus align with its higher core count and newer architecture.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, while the Core 5 211E has no series designation. The generation labels also differ: the Core 5 211E is listed as “Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)”, and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is listed as “Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake)”. Both processors are marked as Active in production status and target the Desktop market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins in all multi-threaded scenarios. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show it ahead by 53.9% to 69.1%. The Passmark suite confirms this across every workload: data compression (56.9% lead), data encryption (69.6% lead), extended instructions (66% lead), prime number search (93% lead), floating point math (71.1% lead), integer math (49.9% lead), physics (82.7% lead), random string sorting (64.6% lead), and multi-thread (65.2% lead). The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus also wins the Passmark single-thread tests by 21%. The data indicates this processor is optimized for heavy parallel workloads, encryption, and scientific calculations.

The Intel Core 5 211E wins only the Cinebench R23 single-core test, with an 18% advantage. This is an isolated result that does not appear in any other single-threaded test. The Passmark single-thread score for the Core 5 211E is 4006, which is 21% lower than the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus’s 5068. The data suggests the Core 5 211E’s win is specific to the Cinebench R23 rendering workload, not a general single-thread advantage. Its lower core count and older 10 nm process limit its performance in every other recorded benchmark. For most applications, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the stronger choice; the Core 5 211E only shows a niche edge in one rendering test.

DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS

SPECIFICATION
5 211E
Ultra 7 270K Plus
Core Specs
Cores
10
24 +140.0%
Threads
16
24 +50.0%
Base Clock (GHz)
2.7
3.7 +37.0%
Boost Clock (GHz)
4.9
5.5 +12.2%
Frequency (GHz)
2.7
3.7 +37.0%
Turbo Clock (GHz)
4.9
5.5 +12.2%
Multiplier
27
37 +37.0%
SMP CPUs
1
1 0.0%
Cache
L1 Cache
80 KB (per core)
192 KB (per core)
L2 Cache
2 MB (per core)
3 MB (per core)
L3 Cache
20 MB (shared)
36 MB (shared)
Power
TDP (W)
65
125 +92.3%
PL1
65 W
250 W
PL2
148 W
250 W
Architecture
Codename
Bartlett Lake
Arrow Lake Refresh
Generation
Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)
Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake)
Process Size
10 nm
3 nm
Transistors
17,800 million
Die Size
257 mm²
243 mm²
Foundry
Intel
TSMC
Memory
Memory Support
DDR4, DDR5
DDR5
Memory Bus
Dual-channel
Dual-channel
Memory Bandwidth
76.8 GB/s
115.2 GB/s
ECC Memory
Yes
Yes
DDR4 Speed
3200 MT/s
Platform
Socket
Intel Socket 1700
Intel Socket 1851
Chipsets
W680, R680E, Q670e, Q670, H610E, H610
Z890, B860, W880, Q870, H810
PCIe
Gen 5, 16 Lanes(CPU only)
Gen 5, 20 Lanes(CPU only)
Intel Hybrid
Hybrid Cores
P-Cores: 6 E-Cores: 4
P-Cores: 8 E-Cores: 16
E-Core Frequency
2000 MHz up to 3.7 GHz
3.2 GHz up to 4.7 GHz
Graphics
Integrated Graphics
UHD Graphics 730
Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU
Other
Market
Desktop
Desktop
Production Status
Active
Active
Launch Price
$221
$299
Part Number
SRQERQ65F
SA4V6
Package
FC-LGA16A
FC-LGA18W
Tj Max
100°C
105°C
View Core 5 211E Details View Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Details