Intel Core i5-1130G7 vs Intel Core i5-8300H Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-1130G7 compare to the Intel Core i5-8300H in overall benchmark scores?

A: The i5-1130G7 has an average benchmark score of 2026, while the i5-8300H scores 2005. That is a difference of roughly 1%, placing both processors in the 45th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The i5-1130G7 wins all three multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 7006 versus 6245 for the i5-8300H, a 12.2% advantage. The same 12.2% gap appears in R15 (706 vs 629) and R20 (2942 vs 2622).

Q: Is the single-core performance gap similar to the multi-core gap?

A: Yes, it is remarkably consistent. The i5-1130G7 leads by 12.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core (99 vs 88), 12.2% in R20 (415 vs 370), and 12.3% in R23 (989 vs 881). The i5-8300H never wins a single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: What are the architectural differences between these two mobile chips?

A: The i5-1130G7 uses Tiger Lake-U on a 10 nm process with 8 MB of shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 per core. The i5-8300H uses Coffee Lake-H on 14 nm with 12 MB shared L3 and 256 KB L2 per core. The i5-1130G7 also features newer Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, while the i5-8300H has UHD 630.

Q: How does the power envelope differ between the two?

A: The i5-1130G7 is rated at 15 W TDP, while the i5-8300H is rated at 45 W TDP. This is a significant difference, yet the lower-power chip still manages to outperform the higher-power part in every recorded benchmark.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i5-1130G7 boosts to 4.00 GHz, while the i5-8300H boosts to 3.90 GHz. The i5-8300H has a higher base clock at 2.30 GHz compared to 1.10 GHz, but the i5-1130G7 compensates with its architecture and process node.

Architecture Differences

The i5-1130G7 and i5-8300H represent two distinct generations of Intel mobile silicon. The i5-1130G7 is built on Tiger Lake-U, using the Willow Cove core architecture and a 10 nm process node. The i5-8300H is a Coffee Lake-H part, using the older 14 nm process. This process gap is central to understanding the performance relationship between the two chips.

The cache hierarchy tells a nuanced story. The i5-1130G7 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, which is substantially larger than the i5-8300H's 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. However, the i5-8300H counters with 12 MB of shared L3 cache versus 8 MB on the i5-1130G7. The larger L2 on the newer chip likely helps feed its higher single-core throughput, while the older chip relies on more L3 to compensate.

Memory support also differs. The i5-1130G7 supports DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s. The i5-8300H also supports DDR4, but the database does not list its memory bus configuration or bandwidth. The i5-1130G7 additionally exposes PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the i5-8300H has no PCIe details recorded.

Integrated graphics are another generational leap. The i5-1130G7 carries Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, while the i5-8300H has UHD 630. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, but the architectural difference is clear: Iris Xe is a newer design with more execution units. The i5-1130G7 also has a smaller die footprint implied by the 10 nm process, though the i5-8300H records a die size of 126 mm².

Production status separates these further. The i5-1130G7 is listed as Active, while the i5-8300H is End-of-life. The i5-8300H has a part number (SR3Z0), while the i5-1130G7 does not. Both are mobile market segments, both use BGA sockets, but the sockets differ: BGA 1598 for Tiger Lake and BGA 1440 for Coffee Lake.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner in the i5-1130G7. It outperforms the i5-8300H in every single benchmark recorded, across six tests spanning three Cinebench versions. The smallest margin is 12.2%, which occurs in most multi-core tests. The largest margin is 12.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core. No test favors the i5-8300H.

Who should pick the i5-1130G7? Users who prioritize both performance and efficiency. The chip delivers higher scores across the board while drawing only 15 W TDP compared to 45 W for the i5-8300H. That makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power draw and thermals matter. Its active production status also means it remains a viable option for new designs.

Who should pick the i5-8300H? The data does not support a performance-based argument. It loses every benchmark, has higher power consumption, and is end-of-life. The only quantitative advantage it holds is a higher base clock (2.30 GHz vs 1.10 GHz) and more L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB). Neither translates into a benchmark win. The i5-8300H may still appear in older systems, but the recorded measurements suggest it is strictly inferior to the newer part.

The verdict is unambiguous: the i5-1130G7 is the better processor in every measurable way, including efficiency. The i5-8300H's higher TDP does not buy performance; it simply consumes more power while losing.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several core specifications: both have 4 cores, 8 threads, and support DDR4 memory. Both are Intel parts with integrated graphics and no unlocked multiplier. Both target the mobile market segment and lack ECC memory support. The differences start with the process node: 10 nm for the i5-1130G7 versus 14 nm for the i5-8300H.

Clock speeds differ notably. The i5-1130G7 has a base clock of 1.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The i5-8300H has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The newer chip boosts higher, while the older chip idles at a higher frequency. TDP is a major differentiator: 15 W for the i5-1130G7 versus 45 W for the i5-8300H.

Cache configurations diverge. The i5-1130G7 uses 96 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core, while the i5-8300H uses 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. L3 is 8 MB shared on the i5-1130G7 versus 12 MB shared on the i5-8300H. The die size is recorded only for the i5-8300H at 126 mm².

Sockets differ: Intel BGA 1598 for the i5-1130G7, Intel BGA 1440 for the i5-8300H. The i5-1130G7 records 68.3 GB/s memory bandwidth and PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the i5-8300H has no memory bandwidth, memory bus, or PCIe data in the database. Integrated graphics also differ: Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU versus UHD 630. Release dates are 2020-09-01 for the i5-1130G7 and 2018-04-01 for the i5-8300H. Production status is Active versus End-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided. The i5-1130G7 wins all six recorded comparisons, with no wins for the i5-8300H. The consistency of the margins is striking: 12.2% appears in four tests, 12.3% in one, and 12.5% in one.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-1130G7 scores 706 against 629, a 12.2% lead. The single-core R15 test shows an even larger gap: 99 versus 88, which is 12.5%. This is the largest percentage difference in the entire comparison. The i5-1130G7's advantage in R15 single-core suggests its architecture excels at latency-sensitive workloads.

Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern. Multi-core scores are 2942 versus 2622, a 12.2% difference. Single-core scores are 415 versus 370, also 12.2%. The i5-8300H cannot close the gap in either metric. The R20 results mirror R15 almost exactly, indicating that the performance relationship is stable across test versions.

Cinebench R23 confirms the trend. Multi-core: 7006 for the i5-1130G7 versus 6245 for the i5-8300H, a 12.2% margin. Single-core: 989 versus 881, a 12.3% margin. The i5-8300H does have a Geekbench result in the database (3920 multi-core, 1286 single-core), but the i5-1130G7 has no Geekbench entry, so no direct comparison exists for that test.

The average benchmark scores in the database tell a similar story. The i5-1130G7 averages 2026, while the i5-8300H averages 2005. Both sit at the 45th percentile of all CPUs, so they occupy the same general performance tier despite the newer chip's consistent wins. The i5-1130G7's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-1145GRE (2025, 0.1% delta) and the Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5 (2029, -0.1% delta). The i5-8300H's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon D-1712TR (2004, 0% delta) and the Intel Core i5-8400H (2003, 0.1% delta).

Where Each One Wins

The i5-1130G7 wins everywhere the database measures. It takes all three multi-core Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23) and all three single-core tests. In multi-core workloads, the 12.2% advantage holds steady regardless of the Cinebench version, which suggests the gap is structural rather than test-specific. The larger L2 cache per core and the 10 nm process likely contribute to this consistent edge.

For single-core workloads, the i5-1130G7 also leads, with the R15 single-core test showing the highest delta at 12.5%. This matters for applications that rely on per-thread performance, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools. The higher boost clock of 4.00 GHz versus 3.90 GHz is a small factor, but the architecture improvements appear to amplify it.

The i5-8300H has no benchmark wins. Its only recorded advantages are qualitative: a higher base clock and more L3 cache. In practice, the higher base clock does not help in the measured tests, and the extra 4 MB of L3 does not compensate for the older core design. The i5-8300H also has a Geekbench result in the database, but without a matching i5-1130G7 result, it cannot claim a victory there.

The use-case split is therefore simple. For any workload represented by Cinebench, the i5-1130G7 is the choice. For users who need active production status, the i5-1130G7 is also the choice, as the i5-8300H is end-of-life. For systems where power draw is a constraint, the 15 W TDP of the i5-1130G7 is far more attractive than the 45 W TDP of the i5-8300H. The older chip might still be found in existing laptops, but the data offers no reason to select it over the i5-1130G7 in a new purchase.