AMD Phenom II X6 1065T vs Intel Core i5-2500S Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Intel Core i5-2500S has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500S has an average benchmark score of 1004, while the AMD Phenom II X6 1065T scores 993. That places the Intel part about 1.1% higher in the database's aggregate metric.

Q: Which CPU has a higher base clock?

A: The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T has a base clock of 2.90 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-2500S runs at 2.70 GHz. However, the Intel part boosts higher, reaching 3.70 GHz compared to the AMD's 3.40 GHz.

Q: What are their TDP ratings?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500S has a TDP of 65 watts, while the AMD Phenom II X6 1065T has a TDP of 125 watts.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-2500S supports DDR3 only, while the AMD Phenom II X6 1065T supports both DDR2 and DDR3.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500S includes Intel HD 2000 graphics. The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T does not include integrated graphics as a CPU feature; it relies on a chipset feature available on certain motherboards.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark in the database. Across all five Cinebench tests, the AMD part takes the top spot, including both multi-core and single-core workloads. The margins are consistent, ranging from 0.6% to 0.7% in favor of the AMD chip.

The Intel Core i5-2500S, however, holds a slight advantage in the aggregate average benchmark score. Its average of 1004 edges out the AMD's 993, a difference of roughly 1.1%. This means that while the AMD wins the specific Cinebench tests, the overall database picture is essentially a dead heat, with the Intel part slightly ahead when other benchmarks beyond Cinebench are included.

The Intel chip also wins on efficiency. With a 65 watt TDP versus the AMD's 125 watts, the Intel part delivers comparable performance at nearly half the power envelope. For scenarios where thermal output and power draw matter, the Intel Core i5-2500S is clearly the better fit.

The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T wins on core count and raw multi-threaded throughput in the recorded Cinebench runs. Its six physical cores give it an edge in workloads that scale across threads, even if the per-core performance is similar to the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The Intel Core i5-2500S is built on Sandy Bridge architecture using a 32 nm process at Intel's foundry. The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T uses the older K10 architecture, codenamed Thuban, fabricated on a 45 nm process at GlobalFoundries.

The process node difference is significant. The Intel chip packs 1,160 million transistors into a 216 mm² die, while the AMD chip contains 904 million transistors on a larger 346 mm² die. This means the Intel part achieves higher transistor density on a smaller physical footprint, which contributes to its much lower 65 watt TDP.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. The Intel Core i5-2500S has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, with 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T has double the L1 cache at 128 KB per core and double the L2 at 512 KB per core, also with 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's larger per-core cache is a consequence of its six-core design and older architecture.

Memory support diverges. The Intel chip supports DDR3 with a dual-channel memory bus. The AMD chip supports both DDR2 and DDR3, also dual-channel, and the database records a memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s for the AMD part. The Intel chip has no listed memory bandwidth figure. The AMD also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe capabilities differ. The Intel Core i5-2500S supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T supports PCIe Gen 2, with no lane count specified in the data.

Integrated graphics is another differentiator. The Intel chip includes Intel HD 2000 graphics. The AMD chip has no integrated graphics on the CPU, listing instead a chipset feature available on certain motherboards.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ: 4 cores and 4 threads for the Intel, 6 cores and 6 threads for the AMD. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for Intel and 2.90 GHz for AMD, while boost clocks are 3.70 GHz for Intel and 3.40 GHz for AMD.

TDP is a major split: 65 watts for Intel versus 125 watts for AMD. The socket types differ completely: Intel Socket 1155 for the i5-2500S, AMD Socket AM3 for the Phenom II X6 1065T.

Process node and foundry differ: 32 nm at Intel for the i5-2500S, 45 nm at GlobalFoundries for the AMD. Transistor counts are 1,160 million versus 904 million, and die sizes are 216 mm² versus 346 mm².

L1 and L2 cache sizes differ per core: 64 KB and 256 KB for Intel, 128 KB and 512 KB for AMD. Shared L3 is identical at 6 MB.

Memory support differs: DDR3 only for Intel, DDR2 and DDR3 for AMD. The AMD part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s; the Intel part has none listed. ECC memory is supported on AMD only.

PCIe generation differs: Gen 3 with 16 lanes for Intel, Gen 2 for AMD. Integrated graphics are present on Intel (HD 2000) but absent on AMD as a CPU feature.

Release dates differ by about a month: the Intel chip was released on January 8, 2011, while the AMD chip was released on December 6, 2010. Both are end-of-life products, and neither has a multiplier unlocked.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T wins all five recorded head-to-head benchmarks, though by very narrow margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 290 against the Intel's 288, a 0.7% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the AMD scores 1212 versus 1204, again a 0.7% lead.

Single-core results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the AMD scores 170 against the Intel's 169, a 0.6% margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD scores 407 versus 404, a 0.7% edge. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the AMD at 2888 against the Intel's 2867, another 0.7% difference.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Every recorded Cinebench test shows the AMD part ahead by less than 1%, which indicates that the two processors are extremely close in actual rendering performance. The six-core AMD chip does not run away with multi-threaded workloads despite having 50% more cores, because the Intel Sandy Bridge architecture delivers much higher per-core efficiency.

The Intel Core i5-2500S does not win any of the five head-to-head tests. However, its average benchmark score of 1004 is higher than the AMD's 993. That average includes Geekbench results, where the Intel chip scores 1511 in multi-core and 582 in single-core. The AMD part has no recorded Geekbench scores in the database, which explains why the average favors Intel even though the Cinebench tests favor AMD.

The Intel chip also wins on the efficiency front. Its 65 watt TDP is roughly half the AMD's 125 watts, yet it trails by less than 1% in every Cinebench test. This is a decisive advantage for any scenario where power consumption is a constraint.

The Verdict

The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T is the pick if raw multi-threaded Cinebench performance is the priority. It wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, including both multi-core and single-core tests, with margins of 0.6% to 0.7%. Its six cores and 6 MB of shared L3 cache make it a capable choice for threaded workloads, and its support for DDR2 and DDR3 memory plus ECC adds flexibility for certain system builds.

The Intel Core i5-2500S is the pick if efficiency and overall aggregate performance matter more. Its average benchmark score of 1004 tops the AMD's 993, and it achieves this while drawing 65 watts versus the AMD's 125 watts. The Intel chip also includes integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 3 support, and a smaller 216 mm² die built on a newer 32 nm process.

Benchmark results indicate that these two CPUs are effectively tied in performance. The AMD wins the Cinebench tests, the Intel wins the aggregate average, and the largest performance gap in any recorded test is 0.7%. Neither part offers a meaningful speed advantage over the other.

The deciding factors are therefore system-level. The Intel Core i5-2500S suits a build where power draw, integrated graphics, and PCIe Gen 3 are valuable. The AMD Phenom II X6 1065T suits a build where six cores, ECC memory support, and DDR2 compatibility are needed. Both are end-of-life desktop parts with no unlocked multipliers, so neither offers overclocking headroom. The database shows a near-perfect performance tie, with the choice coming down to platform features rather than raw speed.