Intel Core i3-5157U vs Intel Core i5-2500T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a consistent picture: the Intel Core i5-2500T wins every recorded head-to-head test, though the margins are not overwhelming. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-2500T scores 250 against the i3-5157U’s 222, a 12.6% advantage. That gap grows slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i5-2500T posts 1045 versus 925, a 13% lead. The same 13% margin appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, with scores of 147 and 130 respectively.

Moving to Cinebench R23, the pattern holds. The i5-2500T’s multi-core score of 2489 beats the i3-5157U’s 2203 by 13%, while single-core results show 351 against 311, a 12.9% edge. Across all five recorded tests, the i5-2500T wins outright, with no test favoring the i3-5157U. The win count stands at 5 for the i5-2500T and 0 for the i3-5157U.

What the data does not show is any area where the i3-5157U compensates. The closest contest is Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the 12.6% delta is the smallest of the set. Even there, the i5-2500T’s four physical cores appear to carry the workload more efficiently than the i3-5157U’s two cores with four threads. The single-core deltas, ranging from 12.9% to 13.1%, are remarkably uniform, suggesting a consistent per-thread performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

For context, the i5-2500T sits at the 23rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 856. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-5250U at 856 (a 0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i7-4500U at 859 (a -0.4% delta). The i3-5157U also lands at the 23rd percentile, with an average score of 877, placing it near the AMD Ryzen 3 2300U at 880 (-0.3%) and the AMD PRO A12-8870E at 880 (-0.4%). Despite the higher average score for the i3-5157U, the head-to-head tests show a different story: the i5-2500T leads in every direct comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and are built for different sockets. The i5-2500T uses the Sandy Bridge architecture on a 32 nm process, fitting the Intel Socket 1155. It packs 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i3-5157U uses Broadwell (specifically Broadwell-U) on a 14 nm process, mounted on Intel BGA 1168, with 1,900 million transistors on a smaller 133 mm² die. The transistor count is higher in the i3-5157U despite the smaller die, reflecting the denser 14 nm manufacturing.

Core configuration differs significantly. The i5-2500T has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i3-5157U has 2 cores and 4 threads. The i5-2500T’s base clock is 2.30 GHz with a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The i3-5157U has a base clock of 2.50 GHz but no boost clock, so it runs at a fixed frequency. This partly explains the i5-2500T’s single-core wins: it can raise its clock to 3.30 GHz under load, while the i3-5157U stays at 2.50 GHz.

Cache layouts also diverge. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache differs: the i5-2500T has 6 MB shared, while the i3-5157U has 3 MB shared. The i3-5157U’s smaller L3 is consistent with its dual-core design. Memory support is DDR3 for both, with dual-channel buses. The i3-5157U records a memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s; the i5-2500T has no recorded bandwidth figure in the database.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The i5-2500T offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-5157U provides PCIe Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are also different: the i5-2500T has Intel HD 2000, while the i3-5157U carries Intel Iris 6100, a more capable graphics solution. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-2500T wins across all recorded multi-core and single-core tests, so its strengths are broad. For multi-threaded workloads such as rendering or video encoding, the i5-2500T’s 4 physical cores provide a structural advantage over the i3-5157U’s 2 cores. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 2489 versus 2203 shows that the i5-2500T handles parallel tasks with 13% more output. The same applies to Cinebench R20 multi-core (1045 vs 925) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (250 vs 222). Users running software that scales with core count will find the i5-2500T consistently ahead.

Single-core performance also favors the i5-2500T, which is notable because the i3-5157U has a higher base clock (2.50 GHz vs 2.30 GHz). The i5-2500T’s boost to 3.30 GHz appears to overcome that base-clock deficit. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-2500T scores 351 against 311, a 12.9% margin. This matters for lightly threaded applications like older games or legacy productivity software.

The i3-5157U has no recorded wins in the benchmark data. However, its architecture offers advantages not captured in the Cinebench tests. The 14 nm process and smaller die (133 mm²) suggest better power efficiency per transistor, and its 28 W TDP is lower than the i5-2500T’s 45 W. The Iris 6100 integrated graphics are a substantial upgrade over Intel HD 2000, which could matter for systems without a discrete GPU. The i3-5157U also has a higher average benchmark score (877 vs 856) when accounting for the full database, though this is driven by test sets that include Geekbench results for the i3-5157U, which the i5-2500T lacks.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two processors are as follows:

• Cores: 4 (i5-2500T) vs 2 (i3-5157U)
• Threads: 4 (both)
• Base clock: 2.30 GHz (i5-2500T) vs 2.50 GHz (i3-5157U)
• Boost clock: 3.30 GHz (i5-2500T) vs none (i3-5157U)
• TDP: 45 W (i5-2500T) vs 28 W (i3-5157U)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1155 (i5-2500T) vs Intel BGA 1168 (i3-5157U)
• Architecture: Sandy Bridge (i5-2500T) vs Broadwell (i3-5157U)
• Process node: 32 nm (i5-2500T) vs 14 nm (i3-5157U)
• Transistors: 1,160 million (i5-2500T) vs 1,900 million (i3-5157U)
• Die size: 216 mm² (i5-2500T) vs 133 mm² (i3-5157U)
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared (i5-2500T) vs 3 MB shared (i3-5157U)
• Memory bandwidth: not recorded (i5-2500T) vs 29.9 GB/s (i3-5157U)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes (i5-2500T) vs Gen 2, 12 lanes (i3-5157U)
• Integrated graphics: Intel HD 2000 (i5-2500T) vs Intel Iris 6100 (i3-5157U)
• Market segment: Desktop (i5-2500T) vs Mobile (i3-5157U)
• Release date: 2011 (i5-2500T) vs 2015 (i3-5157U)
• Launch MSRP: none recorded (i5-2500T) vs $315 (i3-5157U)

FAQ

Q: Which processor performs better in multi-core benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500T wins all recorded multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2489 versus the i3-5157U’s 2203, a 13% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1045 versus 925, also a 13% margin.

Q: Does the i3-5157U have any advantage in single-core performance?

A: No. The i5-2500T wins every single-core test despite the i3-5157U’s higher base clock (2.50 GHz vs 2.30 GHz). In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-2500T scores 351 against 311, a 12.9% edge.

Q: How do their TDPs compare?

A: The i5-2500T has a 45 W TDP, while the i3-5157U has a 28 W TDP. The i3-5157U is designed for mobile platforms and draws less power.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The i5-2500T has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i3-5157U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Both support four threads total, but the i5-2500T has two additional physical cores.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The i3-5157U features Intel Iris 6100, while the i5-2500T has Intel HD 2000. The Iris 6100 is the more advanced graphics solution.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Neither the i5-2500T nor the i3-5157U supports ECC memory.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous in raw performance: the Intel Core i5-2500T is the faster processor across every benchmark where both were measured. Its 4 cores and boost clock to 3.30 GHz deliver consistent double-digit leads over the i3-5157U, which is limited to 2 cores and a fixed 2.50 GHz clock. Users building a desktop system around the Intel Socket 1155 and prioritizing CPU-bound tasks will get more throughput from the i5-2500T.

However, the i3-5157U is not without merit in specific contexts. Its 28 W TDP makes it suitable for compact or mobile designs where power efficiency matters, and its Intel Iris 6100 integrated graphics are a clear upgrade over the i5-2500T’s HD 2000. The i3-5157U also has a higher average benchmark score (877 vs 856) when considering the broader database, though this is not reflected in the head-to-head Cinebench tests.

For a desktop user with access to a discrete GPU, the i5-2500T is the better choice based on the recorded data. For a mobile user who relies on integrated graphics and needs lower power draw, the i3-5157U offers architectural advantages that the benchmarks do not capture. The i5-2500T wins all five head-to-head tests, but the i3-5157U remains competitive in its intended mobile segment.