Intel Core i5-10300H vs Intel Core i7-1165G7 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-10300H and Intel Core i7-1165G7 are both 4-core, 8-thread mobile processors, but they deliver distinctly different performance profiles. The benchmark data shows a clear split: the i7-1165G7 wins 18 of 25 head-to-head tests, while the i5-10300H wins 7. Despite this, the overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the i5-10300H at 9243 and the i7-1165G7 at 9235, a delta of just 0.1%. This near-tie in aggregate scoring masks a fundamental divergence in workload behavior that defines which processor is better suited for specific tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single victory for the i7-1165G7 comes in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 5561 against the i5-10300H’s 2770, a massive 50.2% advantage. This is the most lopsided result in the entire comparison and indicates a significant architectural edge in cryptographic workloads. Similarly, in PassMark find prime numbers, the i7-1165G7 leads by 41.3% (46 vs 27), and in PassMark physics it is 27.8% ahead (712 vs 514). These are not marginal wins; they represent a consistent pattern of the Tiger Lake architecture dominating in integer-heavy and math-intensive tasks.

The i7-1165G7 also sweeps the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 8293 versus 6950 for the i5-10300H, a 16.2% lead. The same delta of 16.2% appears in Cinebench R15 multicore (835 vs 700) and Cinebench R20 multicore (3483 vs 2919). Single-core Cinebench results follow the identical pattern: the i7-1165G7 leads by 16.2% in R15 (117 vs 98) and R23 (1170 vs 981), and by 16.1% in R20 (491 vs 412). Geekbench confirms this trend, with the i7-1165G7 ahead by 16.3% in single-core (1578 vs 1321) and 8.7% in multi-core (4467 vs 4080).

In 3DMark, the story reverses but with smaller margins. The i5-10300H wins the 16-thread test by 13.3% (2965 vs 2617), the 8-thread test by 18.3% (2957 vs 2500), and the max-threads test by 11.9% (2961 vs 2645). The 4-thread test goes to the i5-10300H by 9.3% (2202 vs 2015). The i7-1165G7 only manages a 0.4% win in the 2-thread test (1342 vs 1337) and a 13.1% win in single-thread (811 vs 705). This suggests the i5-10300H’s higher 45W TDP and sustained power delivery allow it to maintain better multi-threaded performance in synthetic gaming benchmarks, despite the i7-1165G7’s superior per-core architecture.

PassMark multi-threaded results show the i7-1165G7 ahead by 17% (9958 vs 8262), and it also wins integer math by 18.9% (33349 vs 27046) and floating-point math by 13.9% (19830 vs 17076). The i5-10300H fights back in data compression, winning by 13.3% (117306 vs 103497), and in random string sorting, winning by 17.8% (14956 vs 12698). Extended instructions go to the i5-10300H by a narrow 1.7% (7449 vs 7323).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and process nodes. The i5-10300H is built on the Comet Lake architecture (Comet Lake-H codename) using a 14 nm process, while the i7-1165G7 uses the Tiger Lake architecture (Tiger Lake-U codename) on a 10 nm node. This process shrink is a primary driver of the i7-1165G7’s higher efficiency and per-clock performance.

Both have 4 cores and 8 threads, but the cache hierarchies differ substantially. The i5-10300H has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i7-1165G7 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The i7-1165G7’s L2 cache is nearly five times larger per core, and its L3 is double the size, which helps explain its dominance in integer math and prime number tests.

Clock speeds also favor the i7-1165G7. Its base clock is 2.80 GHz and boost clock is 4.70 GHz, versus 2.50 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost for the i5-10300H. The i7-1165G7’s higher boost clock directly contributes to its 16%+ wins in single-core benchmarks. However, the i5-10300H has a 45W TDP compared to the i7-1165G7’s 28W, meaning the H-series chip is designed for sustained multi-core loads in thicker laptops, while the U-series chip targets thinner, power-constrained designs.

The i7-1165G7 also features a more advanced integrated GPU: Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 96EU, versus UHD Graphics on the i5-10300H. Memory support differs as well, with the i7-1165G7 supporting LPDDR4X in addition to DDR4, while the i5-10300H supports DDR3 and DDR4. The i7-1165G7 also has PCIe Gen 4 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-10300H is limited to PCIe Gen 3. The i7-1165G7 has a die size of 144 mm², while the i5-10300H’s die size is not listed. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-1165G7 wins every single-thread benchmark. It leads by 13.1% in 3DMark single-thread (811 vs 705), by 16.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1170 vs 981), and by 16.3% in Geekbench single-core (1578 vs 1321). PassMark single-thread also goes to the i7-1165G7 by 8.2% (2763 vs 2537).

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

A: The i7-1165G7 wins most multi-threaded tests, including Cinebench R23 multicore by 16.2% (8293 vs 6950) and PassMark multithread by 17% (9958 vs 8262). However, the i5-10300H wins 3DMark multi-threaded tests, such as the 8-thread test by 18.3% (2957 vs 2500) and the 16-thread test by 13.3% (2965 vs 2617).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark data encryption, where the i7-1165G7 scores 5561 versus the i5-10300H’s 2770, a 50.2% advantage. The second-largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, with the i7-1165G7 leading by 41.3% (46 vs 27).

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The i7-1165G7 has a 28W TDP, while the i5-10300H has a 45W TDP. The i7-1165G7 achieves better single-core and most multi-core scores despite the lower power envelope, indicating higher efficiency per watt.

Q: Do they use the same socket?

A: No. The i5-10300H uses Intel BGA 1440, while the i7-1165G7 uses Intel BGA 1449. They are not interchangeable.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The i7-1165G7 features Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 96EU, while the i5-10300H has UHD Graphics. The i7-1165G7’s integrated GPU is the more capable of the two.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i7-1165G7 as the superior processor for most general-purpose computing. It wins 18 of 25 benchmark comparisons, and its victories are concentrated in the workloads that matter most for everyday use: single-thread performance, Cinebench rendering, Geekbench, and PassMark math and encryption tests. The 16.2% lead across all Cinebench versions and the 50.2% lead in encryption demonstrate a consistent architectural advantage that the i5-10300H cannot overcome. The i7-1165G7’s 28W TDP also makes it the better fit for thin-and-light laptops, delivering higher performance at lower power.

The Intel Core i5-10300H is not without merit, but its wins are narrowly focused. It dominates 3DMark multi-threaded tests, with an 18.3% lead in the 8-thread test and a 13.3% lead in the 16-thread test. It also wins data compression by 13.3% and random string sorting by 17.8%. These results indicate that the i5-10300H is better suited for sustained multi-threaded loads that simulate gaming or content creation scenarios, likely due to its higher 45W TDP allowing for longer boost periods. However, the overall average benchmark score of 9243 for the i5-10300H versus 9235 for the i7-1165G7 shows they are statistically tied in aggregate, meaning the i5-10300H’s wins are substantial enough to offset the i7-1165G7’s broader dominance.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The i5-10300H has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the i7-1165G7 has a 2.80 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. TDP is 45W for the i5-10300H and 28W for the i7-1165G7. The i5-10300H uses Intel BGA 1440 socket; the i7-1165G7 uses Intel BGA 1449. The i5-10300H is built on 14 nm Comet Lake, while the i7-1165G7 is on 10 nm Tiger Lake. Cache differs: the i5-10300H has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB L3 shared, while the i7-1165G7 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB L3 shared. The i5-10300H supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the i7-1165G7 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X. The i5-10300H has PCIe Gen 3, while the i7-1165G7 has PCIe Gen 4 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The i5-10300H has UHD Graphics, while the i7-1165G7 has Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 96EU. The i5-10300H is marked Active in production, while the i7-1165G7 is End-of-life. The i7-1165G7 has a listed die size of 144 mm²; the i5-10300H’s is not listed. The i7-1165G7 has a launch MSRP of $426; the i5-10300H has no listed launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-1165G7 is the clear winner for most computing tasks. It wins all Cinebench benchmarks (R15, R20, R23) in both single-core and multi-core, all Geekbench tests, and the majority of PassMark tests including multithread, integer math, floating-point math, physics, encryption, and prime numbers. It also wins 3DMark single-thread and 2-thread tests. This makes it the better choice for productivity, content creation, software development, and any workload that relies on strong per-core performance or modern instruction sets.

The Intel Core i5-10300H wins specifically in 3DMark multi-threaded tests (4-thread, 8-thread, 16-thread, and max-threads) and in PassMark data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting. These wins suggest it is better suited for gaming scenarios, compression-heavy workloads, and tasks that benefit from sustained multi-threaded execution over a longer period, likely due to its higher 45W TDP enabling more consistent boost behavior.

For users prioritizing battery life and portability, the i7-1165G7’s 28W TDP is the deciding factor. For users with a laptop that has robust cooling and a focus on gaming or compression, the i5-10300H’s 3DMark and data compression wins provide a valid alternative. However, the i7-1165G7’s overwhelming advantage in 18 of 25 tests, including all Cinebench and Geekbench results, makes it the safer recommendation for a general-purpose mobile processor.