Intel Core i3-8109U vs Intel Core i5-2500 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-8109U and Intel Core i5-2500 represent two very different eras of Intel design: a modern, power-efficient mobile chip versus a legacy desktop workhorse. Despite the i5-2500’s advantages in core count and cache size, the benchmark data consistently favors the newer i3-8109U across every tested workload, with victory margins ranging from a narrow 1.8% to a commanding 77.3%. This analysis details where each processor excels, the architectural reasons for the performance gap, and which user profile aligns with each chip.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-8109U wins every single-core benchmark. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 1188 versus the i5-2500’s 670, a 77.3% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i3-8109U leads with 500 points over the i5-2500’s 491, a 1.8% edge.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The i3-8109U takes the multi-core victory in all four tested scenarios. The largest margin is in Geekbench multi-core, where the i3-8109U scores 2454 against the i5-2500’s 1883, a 30.3% lead. The smallest multi-core win is in Cinebench R15, with 357 versus 350 (2%).

Q: What are the core and thread configurations?

A: The i3-8109U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i5-2500 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Despite having half the physical cores, the i3-8109U’s Hyper-Threading (implied by 4 threads) and newer architecture allow it to outperform the i5-2500 in every benchmark.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500 features a 6 MB shared L3 cache, while the i3-8109U has a 4 MB shared L3 cache. Both have identical L1 and L2 cache sizes at 64 KB and 256 KB per core, respectively.

Q: What are the production statuses of these chips?

A: The i3-8109U is listed as "Active" production, while the i5-2500 is "End-of-life." This reflects the i3-8109U’s 2018 release date versus the i5-2500’s 2011 launch.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare to the field?

A: Both processors sit at the 34th percentile among all CPUs. The i3-8109U has an average benchmark score of 1235, while the i5-2500 scores 1220. The i3-8109U’s closest rival is the Intel Pentium Gold G6600 (0% delta), and the i5-2500’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-3632QM (0.1% delta).

Architecture Differences

The most fundamental divergence is the process node and architecture generation. The i3-8109U is built on a 14 nm process using the Kaby Lake-R architecture (codename Kaby Lake), while the i5-2500 uses a 32 nm process with the Sandy Bridge architecture. This 18 nm difference translates into a substantially smaller die for the i3-8109U at 123 mm², compared to the i5-2500’s 216 mm². The i5-2500 compensates with a much higher transistor count of 1,160 million, but the newer process allows the i3-8109U to achieve better performance per watt and per transistor.

The core topology is another critical difference. The i3-8109U employs 2 physical cores with 4 threads (Hyper-Threading), while the i5-2500 uses 4 physical cores with 4 threads (no Hyper-Threading). This means the i5-2500 has a raw physical core advantage, yet the i3-8109U’s newer microarchitecture and higher instructions-per-clock (IPC) more than offset that deficit. Clock speeds also favor the i5-2500 on paper: its base clock is 3.30 GHz and boost is 3.70 GHz, versus the i3-8109U’s 3.00 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. Despite lower clocks, the i3-8109U wins every benchmark.

Memory support and platform targets differ sharply. The i3-8109U supports DDR4 memory and is a mobile part on the Intel BGA 1356 socket, with a thermal design power (TDP) of 28 W. The i5-2500 is a desktop chip on Intel Socket 1155, supports DDR3 memory with dual-channel capability, has a 95 W TDP, and offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also diverge: the i3-8109U carries Iris Pro Plus, while the i5-2500 has Intel HD 2000.

The Verdict

For any workload measured in this comparison, the Intel Core i3-8109U is the unambiguous performance winner, taking all 7 head-to-head benchmarks. The data suggests that the i3-8109U is the better choice for users prioritizing raw speed in both single-threaded and multi-threaded applications, despite having fewer physical cores. Its 77.3% lead in Geekbench single-core and 30.3% lead in Geekbench multi-core highlight a generational leap in efficiency and IPC that the i5-2500 cannot overcome.

The i5-2500’s only potential advantages are historical and platform-based. It supports DDR3 memory and has a larger 6 MB L3 cache, which might appeal to users with existing legacy DDR3 systems on Socket 1155. However, its 95 W TDP and end-of-life production status make it a less attractive option for new builds. The i3-8109U’s 28 W TDP and active production status indicate it is a more modern, power-efficient solution, ideal for mobile or compact systems. Users needing a desktop CPU with four physical cores and legacy memory support might still consider the i5-2500, but benchmark results show they would sacrifice significant performance in all tested categories.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-8109U | Intel Core i5-2500 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1356 | Intel Socket 1155 |

| Architecture | Kaby Lake | Sandy Bridge |

| Codename | Kaby Lake-R | Sandy Bridge |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 32 nm |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 216 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 1,160 million |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | Not specified | Dual-channel |

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Pro Plus | Intel HD 2000 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2018-04-04 | 2011-01-08 |

| Part Number | Not specified | SR00T |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in Geekbench single-core, where the i3-8109U scores 1188 against the i5-2500’s 670. This 77.3% delta is the largest margin in the entire comparison, demonstrating the massive IPC improvement from Sandy Bridge to Kaby Lake-R. In practical terms, this means the i3-8109U will feel significantly snappier in everyday tasks that rely on single-thread performance, such as web browsing or office applications.

The Geekbench multi-core test also shows a substantial gap, with the i3-8109U at 2454 versus the i5-2500’s 1883. The 30.3% delta is notable because the i5-2500 has twice the physical cores. This indicates that the i3-8109U’s Hyper-Threading and architectural efficiency more than compensate for the core deficit, delivering a decisive win in a workload that should theoretically favor the 4-core part.

In the Cinebench suite, the margins are much tighter but still consistently favor the i3-8109U. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-8109U scores 357 over the i5-2500’s 350, a 2% delta. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1488 versus 1461 (1.8%), and Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 3544 versus 3479 (1.9%). These results suggest that in heavily threaded rendering tasks, the i5-2500’s additional cores nearly close the gap, but the i3-8109U’s IPC advantage still edges it out.

Single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-8109U leads 210 to 206 (1.9%), and in Cinebench R23 single-core, it leads 500 to 491 (1.8%). These margins are small but absolute, confirming that the i3-8109U holds the performance crown across all tested synthetic benchmarks. The i5-2500’s closest rival data lists the Intel Core i7-3632QM at a 0.1% delta, while the i3-8109U’s nearest rival is the Pentium Gold G6600 at a 0% delta, placing both chips in similar competitive tiers despite the i3-8109U’s clear win in this direct matchup.