5 211E vs 5 320
Aggregate performance score
Core 5 211E outperforms Core 5 320 by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1092 | 679 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 11.04 | 29.72 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Wildcat Lake (2026) | Bartlett Lake (2025−2026) |
| Release date | 16 April 2026 (less than a year ago) | 13 January 2025 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $340 | $221 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
5 211E has 169% better value for money than Core 5 320.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.6 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | no data | 257 mm2 |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Security technologies
Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Intel UHD Graphics 730 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 5 320 and Core 5 211E.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | 20 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.69 | 13.77 |
| Recency | 16 April 2026 | 13 January 2025 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 10 |
| Threads | 6 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Core 5 320 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 233% more advanced lithography process, and 333% lower power consumption.
5 211E, on the other hand, has a 58% higher aggregate performance score, and 67% more physical cores and 167% more threads.
The Intel Core 5 211E is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 5 320 in performance tests.
Be aware that Core 5 320 is a notebook processor while Core 5 211E is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
