Intel Core i3-4160 vs Intel Core i7-5600U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a consistent picture across every recorded workload: the Intel Core i3-4160 wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with no victories for the Core i7-5600U. The margins are remarkably uniform, hovering between 16.5% and 16.7% in favor of the desktop chip.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-4160 scores 297 against 255 for the i7-5600U, a 16.5% advantage. That same 16.5% delta repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the scores are 1241 and 1065 respectively. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23 multi-core: 2955 for the i3-4160 versus 2537 for the i7-5600U, again a 16.5% lead.

Single-threaded performance tells the same story, but with a slightly larger gap. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4160 posts 175 against 150 for the i7-5600U, a 16.7% edge. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 417 versus 358, which is a 16.5% difference. No benchmark in the database records a win for the mobile chip.

Looking at the broader average benchmark score, the i3-4160 sits at 1017 while the i7-5600U trails at 1005. Both CPUs land in similar overall percentiles, with the i3-4160 at the 28th percentile of all CPUs and the i7-5600U at the 27th. The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce how close their aggregate positioning is. The i3-4160 is effectively tied with the Intel Core i5-2300 (1014, 0.3% behind), the Intel Core i3-4330 (1020, 0.3% ahead), the Intel Xeon W5580 (1012, 0.5% behind), and the Intel Pentium Gold G5600 (1022, 0.5% ahead). The i7-5600U matches the Intel Core i7-2630QM exactly at 1005, and sits within 0.1% of both the AMD FX-9830P (1006) and the Intel Core i7-880 (1006), while edging the Intel Core i5-4300M (1004) by 0.1%.

The per-test deltas are larger than the aggregate score difference would suggest. Although the average scores differ by just 1.2%, the Cinebench suite shows a consistent 16.5% gap. That discrepancy indicates the two chips excel in different workload profiles, with the desktop part pulling ahead specifically in rendering-oriented tasks.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-4160 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. Anyone choosing between these two strictly on performance should select the i3-4160, as it delivers a 16.5% or better advantage across all five Cinebench tests, both multi-core and single-core.

However, the i7-5600U occupies a different market segment entirely. It is a mobile processor with a 15W TDP, designed for thin-and-light laptops, while the i3-4160 is a desktop part with a 54W TDP. The i7-5600U carries a launch MSRP of $393, which the database records as its official introductory price. The i3-4160 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

For a desktop user who values raw compute throughput, the i3-4160 is the clear choice. Its higher base clock of 3.60 GHz, compared to 2.60 GHz with a 3.20 GHz boost on the i7-5600U, contributes to its consistent lead. The i7-5600U, despite being an i7-branded part, cannot match the desktop chip in these tests.

The production status also matters. The i3-4160 is listed as active, meaning it remains available in the market. The i7-5600U is end-of-life, which suggests it is being phased out of production. From a longevity and availability standpoint, the desktop processor is the safer acquisition.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i3-4160 wins in: every benchmark category recorded. Multi-core rendering favors it by 16.5% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. Single-core performance favors it by 16.5% to 16.7%. The desktop chip also wins on clock speed, with a 3.60 GHz base clock versus 2.60 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost on the mobile part. Its 3 MB of shared L3 cache is smaller than the i7-5600U's 4 MB, but that does not translate into a performance advantage for the mobile chip in any test.

Intel Core i7-5600U wins in: efficiency and mobility, though the database records no benchmark wins. Its 15W TDP is dramatically lower than the 54W TDP of the i3-4160, making it suitable for fanless or passively cooled designs and extended battery life. It also has a smaller die size at 82 mm² versus 177 mm², and a more advanced 14 nm process node compared to 22 nm. The i7-5600U supports PCIe Gen 2 with 12 lanes, while the i3-4160 uses PCIe Gen 3, but the mobile chip has a newer integrated graphics solution in the Intel HD 5500 versus the HD 4400 on the desktop part.

For users who need a CPU that can be embedded into a laptop motherboard (BGA 1168 socket), the i7-5600U is the only option of the two. The i3-4160 requires a desktop LGA 1150 socket. The i7-5600U also records a memory bandwidth figure of 25.6 GB/s, which the database does not list for the i3-4160.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-4160. It beats the i7-5600U by 16.5% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (297 vs 255), Cinebench R20 multi-core (1241 vs 1065), and Cinebench R23 multi-core (2955 vs 2537).

Q: Does the i7-5600U win any benchmark?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the i7-5600U across all five head-to-head tests. The i3-4160 wins all five.

Q: How do their overall average scores compare?

A: The i3-4160 has an average benchmark score of 1017, while the i7-5600U scores 1005. The i3-4160 sits at the 28th percentile of all CPUs, and the i7-5600U at the 27th.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The i3-4160 has a TDP of 54W, while the i7-5600U has a TDP of 15W. The mobile chip uses substantially less power.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i7-5600U has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4160 has 3 MB. Both have identical L1 and L2 cache sizes: 64 KB per core and 256 KB per core, respectively.

Q: Are these chips on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The i3-4160 uses a 22 nm process node with 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The i7-5600U uses a 14 nm process node with 1,300 million transistors on an 82 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures and generations. The i3-4160 is built on Haswell, listed as the Core i3 (Haswell) generation, while the i7-5600U is Broadwell, listed as Core i7 (Broadwell-U). The process node differs by one full step: 22 nm for the desktop part versus 14 nm for the mobile part. The transistor counts are close, 1,400 million versus 1,300 million, but the die size is dramatically different. The i3-4160 measures 177 mm², more than double the 82 mm² of the i7-5600U.

Both chips feature 2 physical cores and 4 threads, with no unlocked multipliers. Cache configurations are similar in structure, with 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core on both, but the L3 differs: 3 MB shared on the i3-4160 versus 4 MB shared on the i7-5600U. Memory support is DDR3 dual-channel for both, with the i7-5600U explicitly listing 25.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics differ. The i3-4160 includes Intel HD 4400, while the i7-5600U includes Intel HD 5500. PCIe support also differs: the i3-4160 provides Gen 3, while the i7-5600U provides Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only).

The socket and market segment separate them clearly. The i3-4160 is a desktop processor for Intel Socket 1150, released on 2014-07-20 and still active in production. The i7-5600U is a mobile processor for Intel BGA 1168, released on 2015-02-28 and now end-of-life, with part number SR23V. The clock speeds reinforce the performance split: the i3-4160 runs at a fixed 3.60 GHz with no boost, while the i7-5600U runs at 2.60 GHz base and boosts to 3.20 GHz.

The architectural choices reflect their intended roles. The desktop chip uses a larger, older process to deliver higher sustained clocks. The mobile chip uses a smaller, newer process to cut power consumption to 15W, enabling thin laptop designs, but sacrifices clock speed and per-thread performance. The benchmark results show that the i3-4160's clock advantage outweighs the i7-5600U's newer architecture and larger L3 cache in every tested workload.