AMD FX-8800P vs Intel Core i5-5250U Comparison

The Intel Core i5-5250U and AMD FX-8800P are two 15-watt mobile processors from 2015 that took very different approaches to the same problem. The data shows a clear split: Intel wins decisively in Geekbench, while AMD dominates every Cinebench test in this comparison. With the AMD FX-8800P taking 5 of the 7 head-to-head benchmarks and the Intel Core i5-5250U claiming the other 2, the overall average benchmark scores are remarkably close — 856 for Intel versus 843 for AMD, a margin of just 1.5%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in this comparison is the Geekbench single-core test, where the Intel Core i5-5250U posts a score of 825 against the AMD FX-8800P’s 524. That is a 57.4% advantage for Intel, the largest delta in any benchmark here. The Intel chip’s per-core strength is further confirmed in Geekbench multicore, where it scores 1,587 versus AMD’s 1,234, a 28.6% lead. Despite having only 2 physical cores and 4 threads, the Intel part’s efficiency per clock is evident in these tests.

The story flips entirely in Cinebench. The AMD FX-8800P wins every single Cinebench iteration, and the margin is remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, AMD scores 242 against Intel’s 209, a 13.6% advantage. The same 13.6% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multicore (1,010 vs. 873) and Cinebench R23 multicore (2,407 vs. 2,079). Even in single-core Cinebench tests, AMD leads by nearly the same margin: 142 vs. 123 in R20 single-core (13.4% ahead) and 339 vs. 293 in R23 single-core (13.6% ahead).

This consistency across Cinebench versions suggests a fundamental architectural advantage for AMD in this specific workload, rather than a scaling quirk. The FX-8800P’s 4 physical cores and higher base and boost clocks — 2.10 GHz and 3.40 GHz respectively, versus Intel’s 1.60 GHz and 2.70 GHz — likely drive these wins. The Intel chip’s Geekbench dominance, meanwhile, points to superior instructions-per-clock in that benchmark suite.

The overall average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story. Intel’s average is 856, placing it exactly level with the Intel Core i5-2500T (0% delta). AMD’s average of 843 matches the Intel Core i7-3520M exactly. Both CPUs sit in the low 20s for percentile ranking among all CPUs — Intel at 23, AMD at 22 — indicating that while they trade blows with each other, neither is a performance leader in the broader CPU landscape. The Intel part’s nearest rivals include the AMD A8-7650K (860, 0.5% ahead) and the Intel Xeon X5492 (852, 0.5% behind). AMD’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-920 (840, 0.3% behind) and the Intel Core i5-3380M (838, 0.6% behind).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-5250U uses the Broadwell architecture (codename Broadwell-U) built on a 14 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. It packs 1,900 million transistors into a 133 mm² die. The AMD FX-8800P uses the Excavator architecture (codename Carrizo) fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 28 nm process, with 3,100 million transistors spread across a much larger 250 mm² die. That is a 74% larger die and a 63% higher transistor count for AMD, yet both consume the same 15 W thermal design power.

Core configuration differs sharply. Intel offers 2 cores and 4 threads with a 1.60 GHz base clock and 2.70 GHz boost. AMD provides 4 physical cores and 4 threads, with a 2.10 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. AMD’s clocks are substantially higher — 31% higher base and 26% higher boost — but Intel’s Hyper-Threading allows its 2 cores to handle 4 threads, partially compensating for the core deficit.

Cache hierarchies are also distinct. Intel allocates 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus a 3 MB shared L3 cache. AMD’s design uses 320 KB of total L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache at all. The lack of L3 cache on AMD is notable; Intel’s 3 MB shared L3 helps offset AMD’s higher clocks in memory-sensitive workloads.

Memory bandwidth favors AMD slightly. Both support DDR3 with dual-channel memory buses, but AMD’s 34.1 GB/s bandwidth edges out Intel’s 29.9 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: Intel offers Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are present on both: Intel HD 6000 for the Core i5, Radeon R7 8CU for the FX-8800P.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has 4 physical cores and 4 threads. The Intel Core i5-5250U has 2 physical cores and 4 threads, using Hyper-Threading to match AMD’s thread count.

Q: Why does Intel win Geekbench by such a large margin?

A: The Intel Core i5-5250U scores 825 in Geekbench single-core versus 524 for AMD (57.4% ahead) and 1,587 versus 1,234 in multicore (28.6% ahead). This suggests Intel’s microarchitecture delivers significantly higher instructions-per-clock in this workload, despite lower clock speeds.

Q: Does AMD win every Cinebench test?

A: Yes. The AMD FX-8800P wins Cinebench R15 multicore (242 vs. 209), R20 multicore (1,010 vs. 873), R20 single-core (142 vs. 123), R23 multicore (2,407 vs. 2,079), and R23 single-core (339 vs. 293). All five wins come with a delta of approximately 13.4-13.6%.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: No. Both are end-of-life products. The Intel Core i5-5250U was released on 2015-02-28, and the AMD FX-8800P followed on 2015-06-01.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: No. Neither the Intel Core i5-5250U nor the AMD FX-8800P supports ECC memory. Both support DDR3 with dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which CPU has the higher overall benchmark average?

A: The Intel Core i5-5250U has an average benchmark score of 856, which is 1.5% higher than the AMD FX-8800P’s 843. However, Intel’s score is tied exactly with the Intel Core i5-2500T, while AMD’s matches the Intel Core i7-3520M.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category:

• Cores: Intel 2, AMD 4
• Threads: Intel 4, AMD 4
• Base Clock: Intel 1.60 GHz, AMD 2.10 GHz
• Boost Clock: Intel 2.70 GHz, AMD 3.40 GHz
• Socket: Intel BGA 1168, AMD Socket FP4
• Architecture: Intel Broadwell, AMD Excavator
• Process Node: Intel 14 nm, AMD 28 nm
• Foundry: Intel, GlobalFoundries
• Transistors: Intel 1,900 million, AMD 3,100 million
• Die Size: Intel 133 mm², AMD 250 mm²
• L1 Cache: Intel 64 KB (per core), AMD 320 KB (total)
• L2 Cache: Intel 256 KB (per core), AMD 1 MB (per module)
• L3 Cache: Intel 3 MB (shared), AMD none
• Memory Bandwidth: Intel 29.9 GB/s, AMD 34.1 GB/s
• PCIe: Intel Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only), AMD Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated Graphics: Intel HD 6000, AMD Radeon R7 8CU
• Launch MSRP: Intel $315, AMD not available

The Verdict

The data presents a clear trade-off rather than a definitive winner. For users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering workloads, the AMD FX-8800P is the better choice. It wins all five Cinebench tests with a consistent 13.6% margin in multicore tests, delivering scores of 242, 1,010, and 2,407 in R15, R20, and R23 respectively, versus Intel’s 209, 873, and 2,079. The AMD part’s higher base clock (2.10 GHz vs. 1.60 GHz) and boost clock (3.40 GHz vs. 2.70 GHz) appear to be the decisive factors.

For Geekbench-based workloads, the Intel Core i5-5250U is clearly superior. Its single-core score of 825 crushes AMD’s 524, and its multicore score of 1,587 beats AMD’s 1,234. The 57.4% single-core delta is substantial enough that any application sensitive to per-thread performance will strongly favor Intel. The Intel chip’s smaller 14 nm process (versus AMD’s 28 nm), smaller die (133 mm² vs. 250 mm²), and L3 cache likely contribute to this efficiency advantage.

The overall averages — 856 for Intel, 843 for AMD — suggest that for mixed workloads, the two parts are nearly equivalent. Both rank in the low 20s percentile among all CPUs (Intel 23, AMD 22). Neither is a performance champion, but each excels in distinct areas. Intel’s launch MSRP was $315, while AMD’s was not disclosed. Users needing Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering should pick AMD; those running Geekbench-style mixed workloads should pick Intel.