Intel Core i5-1038NG7 vs Intel Core i5-10500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the two processors across the eight benchmark tests. The Intel Core i5-10500 dominates the Cinebench suite, winning all six of those tests, while the Intel Core i5-1038NG7 takes both Geekbench tests. This division is not subtle; the margins in each direction are substantial.

Starting with Cinebench R15, the i5-10500 scores 875 in multicore against 750 for the i5-1038NG7, a 16.7% advantage. In single-core R15, the i5-10500 posts 123 versus 105, a 17.1% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore results are 3648 for the i5-10500 and 3125 for the i5-1038NG7, again a 16.7% gap. The single-core R20 test shows 514 versus 441, a 16.6% difference. Cinebench R23 continues the pattern: multicore scores are 8686 for the i5-10500 and 7441 for the i5-1038NG7, a 16.7% margin, while single-core is 1226 versus 1050, a 16.8% edge. The consistency here is notable; every Cinebench result falls within a narrow 16.6% to 17.1% band, suggesting a uniform performance scaling advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Geekbench results flip the narrative entirely. In Geekbench multicore, the i5-1038NG7 scores 4919 against 3381 for the i5-10500, a 31.3% lead for the mobile chip. The single-core Geekbench test shows 1354 versus 1117, a 17.5% advantage for the i5-1038NG7. These are large deltas, and they indicate that the two processors have fundamentally different strengths in how they handle the Geekbench workload mix compared to Cinebench’s rendering-focused tasks.

The overall win tally stands at 6 for the i5-10500 and 2 for the i5-1038NG7. However, the Geekbench margins are larger in magnitude than the Cinebench margins on a percentage basis, particularly the 31.3% multicore swing. This means the average benchmark score, which sits at 2446 for the i5-10500 and 2398 for the i5-1038NG7, only reflects a 2% difference in favor of the desktop part, because the Geekbench wins partially offset the Cinebench losses.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is unusually clean. The Intel Core i5-10500 is the stronger choice for any workload that resembles Cinebench’s rendering and multi-threaded compute patterns. The data shows it leads by roughly 17% across all three Cinebench versions, both in single-core and multicore modes. That consistency suggests a straightforward clock-speed and core-count advantage, which makes the i5-10500 better suited for CPU-intensive tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and batch processing that use all available threads.

The Intel Core i5-1038NG7 wins in Geekbench, which is a more diverse benchmark covering everything from encryption and compression to image processing and machine learning. The 31.3% multicore lead and 17.5% single-core lead in this test point to a processor that excels at mixed, real-world application workloads. The i5-1038NG7’s superior memory bandwidth, listed at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s for the i5-10500, likely contributes to this advantage, as Geekbench includes memory-sensitive tests. For everyday tasks like web browsing, office applications, and light content creation where the workload jumps between different instruction patterns, the i5-1038NG7 appears to have the edge.

The percentile rankings provide context: both processors sit at the 48th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they land in the same overall performance tier. The i5-10500’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon D-1541 at 2447 average score (0.1% behind), the Intel Core i3-1125G4 at 2451 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i5-8600 at 2454 (0.3% behind). The i5-1038NG7’s nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon E5-2630L v3 at 2409 (0.5% behind), the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 4450U at 2413 (0.6% behind), and the Intel Core i5-8600T at 2383 (0.6% ahead). These rival clusters show that neither part is far from a dense pack of comparable performers, but the specific benchmark breakdown matters more than the aggregate.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing nodes. The i5-10500 uses the Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, while the i5-1038NG7 uses Ice Lake, specifically the Ice Lake-U variant, on a 10 nm process. The i5-1038NG7 also has a listed die size of 123 mm², whereas the i5-10500 has no die size recorded. This node difference explains some of the performance character: the 10 nm part has a newer microarchitecture with the Sunny Cove core design, while the 14 nm part relies on the older Skylake-derived core.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The i5-10500 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i5-1038NG7 has 4 cores and 8 threads. This gives the desktop part a 50% advantage in core count and a 50% advantage in thread count, which directly explains its Cinebench multicore dominance. The i5-10500 also has a much larger shared L3 cache at 12 MB versus 6 MB for the i5-1038NG7. However, the mobile part has a larger L1 cache per core at 80 KB versus 64 KB for the desktop part, while L2 cache is identical at 256 KB per core.

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The i5-10500 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The i5-1038NG7 lists a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost of 3.80 GHz. The desktop part’s higher clocks, combined with more cores, give it the Cinebench advantage. The mobile part’s lower clocks are partially offset by the newer architecture and higher memory bandwidth. The i5-1038NG7 is rated at a 28 W TDP, while the i5-10500 is rated at 65 W, which reflects the mobile part’s power-constrained design.

Memory support is DDR4 for both, and both use dual-channel memory buses. However, the i5-1038NG7 has a higher peak memory bandwidth at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s, despite having half the L3 cache. Neither supports ECC memory. The PCIe implementation differs: the i5-10500 supports Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-1038NG7 lists simply Gen 3 without a lane count. The integrated graphics also differ, with the i5-10500 using UHD Graphics 630 and the i5-1038NG7 using Iris Plus.

The sockets are incompatible: the i5-10500 uses Intel Socket 1200, while the i5-1038NG7 uses Intel BGA 1344. The market segments reflect this: the i5-10500 is a desktop part, and the i5-1038NG7 is a mobile part. The production status also differs, with the i5-10500 listed as active and the i5-1038NG7 listed as end-of-life. The release dates are close, with the i5-10500 launching on 2020-04-29 and the i5-1038NG7 on 2020-05-03. The i5-1038NG7 has a launch MSRP of $320, while the i5-10500 has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests overall?

A: The Intel Core i5-10500 wins 6 out of 8 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-1038NG7 wins the remaining 2 tests, which are both Geekbench results.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in either direction?

A: The largest margin is in Geekbench multicore, where the Intel Core i5-1038NG7 leads by 31.3% (4919 versus 3381). The largest margin for the Intel Core i5-10500 is 17.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core (123 versus 105).

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-10500 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i5-1038NG7 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

A: The Intel Core i5-10500 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i5-1038NG7 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core i5-1038NG7 has a higher peak memory bandwidth at 51.2 GB/s, compared to 42.7 GB/s for the Intel Core i5-10500.

Q: Are these processors on the same manufacturing node?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-10500 uses a 14 nm process, while the Intel Core i5-1038NG7 uses a 10 nm process.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ according to the database.

| Specification | Intel Core i5-10500 | Intel Core i5-1038NG7 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 4 |

| Threads | 12 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | Intel BGA 1344 |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Ice Lake |

| Codename | Comet Lake | Ice Lake-U |

| Generation | Core i5 (Comet Lake) | Core i5 (Sunny Cove-U) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 123 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | Iris Plus |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Release Date | 2020-04-29 | 2020-05-03 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $320 |

| Part Number | SRH3A | SRG0V |

| Average Benchmark Score | 2446 | 2398 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 48 | 48 |

The two CPUs share several specifications as well: both are manufactured by Intel, support DDR4 memory, use a dual-channel memory bus, do not support ECC memory, and have a locked multiplier. Both have 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The shared percentile ranking of 48 indicates that, despite the architectural differences, both processors sit at the same overall performance tier in the database.