Intel Atom C5315 vs Intel Core i5-2500T Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Atom C5315 records an average benchmark score of 871, while the Intel Core i5-2500T records 856. That places the Atom C5315 ahead by roughly 1.8% in aggregate performance.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Atom C5315 scores 2533, versus 2489 for the Core i5-2500T. The Atom leads by 1.8% in this test, which is its largest multicore win in the head-to-head data.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Atom C5315 scores 357 and the Core i5-2500T scores 351. The Atom leads by 1.7%. A similar 1.4% advantage appears in Cinebench R20 single-core (149 vs. 147).

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Atom C5315 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-2500T does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The Atom C5315 is built on a 10 nm process, while the Core i5-2500T uses a 32 nm process. The Atom also has a different codename (Parker Ridge) versus Sandy Bridge for the i5-2500T.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each CPU provide?

A: The Atom C5315 provides 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only). The Core i5-2500T provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only).

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is remarkably one-sided. Across all five recorded Cinebench tests, the Intel Atom C5315 wins every single comparison. The Core i5-2500T does not post a single victory in the head-to-head results. However, the margins are narrow, so the practical meaning depends on workload type.

The Atom C5315 wins multicore workloads by margins ranging from 1.7% to 2%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 255 versus 250, a 2% lead. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it scores 1063 versus 1045, a 1.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the gap is 2533 versus 2489, again 1.8%. These results indicate a consistent, though modest, advantage in threaded rendering tasks.

Single-core performance also favors the Atom C5315. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Atom scores 149 against 147, a 1.4% edge. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 357 against 351, a 1.7% edge. The pattern is uniform: the Atom C5315 is slightly faster in every measured scenario.

The Core i5-2500T does have a higher boost clock (3.30 GHz versus no boost clock listed for the Atom), and it includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 2000), which the Atom lacks entirely. For workloads that rely on the iGPU or benefit from higher peak clock speeds in lightly threaded applications, the i5-2500T may hold an unmeasured advantage. But within the database's recorded benchmark suite, the Atom C5315 wins all five tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Atom C5315 uses the Tremont microarchitecture under the Parker Ridge codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It is a 4-core, 4-thread part with no boost clock, no integrated graphics, and a TDP of 38 watts. Its cache layout is distinctive: 64 KB L1 per core and 4.5 MB L2 per module, with no L3 cache listed.

The Core i5-2500T is a Sandy Bridge part, built on Intel's 32 nm process. It also has 4 cores and 4 threads, but it includes a boost clock of 3.30 GHz, a 45 watt TDP, and integrated Intel HD 2000 graphics. Its cache structure is more conventional for desktop CPUs: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The transistor count is listed at 1,160 million with a die size of 216 mm², whereas the Atom C5315 has no transistor or die size figures recorded.

The memory support differs significantly. The Atom C5315 supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s and ECC capability. The Core i5-2500T supports DDR3 memory on a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded and no ECC support. The Atom targets the server/workstation segment, while the i5-2500T is a desktop part.

The sockets also diverge: the Atom uses Intel BGA 2106, while the Core i5-2500T uses Intel Socket 1155. The Atom's PCIe implementation provides 8 Gen 3 lanes, whereas the i5-2500T provides 16 Gen 3 lanes. The production status is Active for the Atom and End-of-life for the i5-2500T.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Atom C5315 | Intel Core i5-2500T |

|----------------|------------------|----------------------|

| Base clock | 2.40 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | None listed | 3.30 GHz |

| TDP | 38 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2106 | Intel Socket 1155 |

| Process node | 10 nm | 32 nm |

| Codename | Parker Ridge | Sandy Bridge |

| L2 cache | 4.5 MB (per module) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | None listed | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC support | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes | 8 (Gen 3) | 16 (Gen 3) |

| Integrated graphics | N/A | Intel HD 2000 |

| Market segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release date | 2022-06-05 | 2011-01-08 |

| Launch MSRP | $213 | Not listed |

The most consequential differences are the process node (10 nm versus 32 nm), memory generation (DDR4 versus DDR3), ECC capability, integrated graphics presence, and PCIe lane count. The Atom C5315 is the only one with ECC and DDR4 support, while the i5-2500T is the only one with an iGPU and a boost clock.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers five Cinebench tests, and the Intel Atom C5315 wins all five. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the Atom scores 255 versus 250, a 2% delta. This is also the only test where the margin reaches 2%; the other four tests fall between 1.4% and 1.8%.

In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Atom scores 1063 and the i5-2500T scores 1045, a 1.7% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the gap is 2533 versus 2489, again 1.8%. These multicore results are consistent: the Atom C5315 is roughly 1.7% to 2% faster across all three Cinebench multicore generations.

Single-core results are similarly consistent. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Atom scores 149 and the i5-2500T scores 147, a 1.4% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Atom scores 357 and the i5-2500T scores 351, a 1.7% lead. The pattern is clear: the Atom C5315 is faster in every recorded benchmark, but the margins are small enough that real-world differences would be difficult to perceive without precise instrumentation.

The average benchmark scores reflect the same outcome. The Atom C5315 has an average score of 871, placing it at the 23rd percentile of all CPUs. The i5-2500T has an average score of 856, also at the 23rd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Atom include the AMD Athlon PRO 3045B (872, -0.1%), Intel Core i7-3540M (867, 0.5%), Intel Xeon X3460 (866, 0.5%), and Intel Core i3-5157U (877, -0.7%). The i5-2500T's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-5250U (856, 0.1%), Intel Core i7-4500U (859, -0.4%), AMD A8-7650K (860, -0.5%), and Intel Xeon X5492 (852, 0.5%).

Both CPUs sit at roughly the same performance tier, surrounded by similar-scoring rivals. The Atom C5315's 871 average is only 0.5% above the Xeon X3460, while the i5-2500T's 856 average is only 0.5% above the Xeon X5492. The head-to-head deltas are consistent with these aggregate standings.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if narrow, winner. The Intel Atom C5315 outperforms the Intel Core i5-2500T in all five recorded Cinebench benchmarks, with margins between 1.4% and 2%. It also carries modern platform advantages: DDR4 memory support, ECC capability, a 10 nm process, and a lower 38 watt TDP compared to 45 watts. The Atom is the better choice for server or workstation deployments where ECC and memory bandwidth matter.

The Core i5-2500T is not without its own merits. It offers integrated graphics (Intel HD 2000), a 3.30 GHz boost clock, and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, all of which the Atom lacks. For a legacy desktop system that needs an iGPU or maximum PCIe connectivity, the i5-2500T may still be serviceable. But its end-of-life status, DDR3 memory support, and lack of ECC make it less attractive for modern workloads.

For users choosing between these two specific parts, the benchmark results are unambiguous: the Atom C5315 wins every test. The margins are small, but they are consistent across single-core and multicore workloads. The Atom also offers a longer production lifecycle (Active versus End-of-life) and a lower TDP. The verdict is straightforward: pick the Atom C5315 if raw benchmark performance and modern platform features are the priority. The i5-2500T only makes sense if the integrated graphics, boost clock, or PCIe lane count are indispensable requirements that the Atom cannot fulfill.