Intel Core i5-1130G7 vs Intel Core i5-8400T Comparison

The Intel Core i5-1130G7 defeats the Intel Core i5-8400T in every benchmark recorded in the database, and the margin is remarkably consistent: roughly eleven and a half percent across all six Cinebench tests, single-core and multi-core alike. That a 15-watt mobile chip outperforms a 35-watt desktop part by a uniform margin is the defining story of this comparison. The i5-1130G7's Tiger Lake architecture, built on a denser 10 nm process, simply outclasses the older 14 nm Coffee Lake design on a per-clock and per-watt basis, and its SMT support lets four physical cores deliver more multi-threaded throughput than the i5-8400T's six cores without hyperthreading. The i5-8400T counters with a larger shared L3 cache, a socketed platform, and availability as an end-of-life desktop part with a launch MSRP of $182, but the recorded performance data leaves no ambiguity about which processor is faster.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-1130G7 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks in the database, six wins to zero. It leads by 11.5 percent in Cinebench R23 multi-core (7006 vs 6282) and 11.6 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core (989 vs 886).

Q: How do the two compare in single-core performance?

A: The i5-1130G7 leads in every single-core test: 99 to 89 in Cinebench R15, 415 to 372 in Cinebench R20, and 989 to 886 in Cinebench R23, an advantage between 11.2 and 11.6 percent.

Q: Can the i5-8400T win any workload?

A: Not in the recorded benchmark set. The data shows zero wins for the i5-8400T across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes. Its six physical cores do not translate into a multi-threaded win because the i5-1130G7's Willow Cove cores are substantially faster per thread.

Q: Are these CPUs comparable in overall standing?

A: Yes, both sit at the 45th percentile versus all CPUs in the database, with average benchmark scores of 2026 for the i5-1130G7 and 2001 for the i5-8400T. They are statistical peers in aggregate terms, despite the i5-1130G7 sweeping the direct comparisons.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor include?

A: The i5-1130G7 ships with Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, while the i5-8400T ships with UHD Graphics 630. The recorded data does not include graphics benchmark scores, so no performance delta can be stated.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The i5-1130G7 is listed as Active, while the i5-8400T is listed as End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-1130G7 wins everywhere the database has measured. It takes all three multi-core Cinebench tests by 11.5 percent and all three single-core tests by 11.2 to 11.6 percent. That symmetry matters: the i5-1130G7 is not a chip that trades single-thread snappiness for multi-thread throughput, or vice versa. It is uniformly faster, whether the workload is lightly threaded or fully parallel. For any task captured by Cinebench rendering benchmarks, the mobile Tiger Lake part is the better performer despite drawing less than half the thermal envelope in name, 15 watts against 35 watts.

The i5-8400T's wins are structural rather than performance-based. It offers a socketed platform, Intel Socket 1151, which means the chip can be installed and replaced in a standard desktop motherboard; the i5-1130G7 is soldered to Intel BGA 1598, a ball-grid array package that is permanently mounted. It also carries more shared L3 cache, 9 MB against 8 MB, and its nearest-rival cluster places it alongside the AMD Ryzen 7 2800H, Intel Core i5-8400H, Intel Xeon D-1712TR, and Intel Core i5-8300H, all within a fraction of a percent of its average score. But none of that changes the on-record result: in measured performance, the i5-8400T wins nothing.

Architecture Differences

These are two Intel designs separated by two architectural generations and one process-node leap. The i5-1130G7 is a Tiger Lake-U processor, built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, using Willow Cove cores. The i5-8400T is a Coffee Lake desktop processor on the long-lived 14 nm process. The node difference is the single most consequential fact in this comparison, because it is what allows the Tiger Lake chip to run higher boost clocks at a lower TDP: 4.00 GHz boost at 15 watts for the i5-1130G7 versus 3.30 GHz boost at 35 watts for the i5-8400T.

Thread provisioning differs sharply. The i5-1130G7 pairs 4 cores with 8 threads via SMT, while the i5-8400T offers 6 cores and 6 threads with no hyperthreading. The benchmark data demonstrates that 8 fast threads beat 6 slower ones in every multi-core test, by a consistent 11.5 percent margin. Per-core cache allocation also favors Tiger Lake: the i5-1130G7 carries 96 KB of L1 per core and a substantial 1.25 MB of L2 per core, against 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core on the Coffee Lake part. The i5-8400T's only cache advantage is the shared pool, 9 MB of L3 to 8 MB, a modest edge that clearly does not compensate for the smaller, slower per-core caches elsewhere in the hierarchy.

Platform features also split along generational lines. The i5-1130G7 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes and delivers 68.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth over its dual-channel DDR4 controller. The i5-8400T is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes and 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth, again dual-channel DDR4. Neither chip supports ECC memory or an unlocked multiplier. Integrated graphics differ by generation too: Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU on Tiger Lake against UHD Graphics 630 on Coffee Lake.

Specification Differences

The market segments differ outright: the i5-1130G7 is a Mobile part, the i5-8400T a Desktop part. That division drives most of the table.

• Cores: 4 (i5-1130G7) vs 6 (i5-8400T)
• Threads: 8 vs 6
• Base clock: 1100.00 MHz vs 1700.00 MHz
• Boost clock: 4.00 GHz vs 3.30 GHz
• TDP: 15 W vs 35 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1598 vs Intel Socket 1151
• Process node: 10 nm vs 14 nm
• L1 cache: 96 KB per core vs 64 KB per core
• L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core vs 256 KB per core
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared vs 9 MB shared
• Memory bandwidth: 68.3 GB/s vs 42.7 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 4, 16 lanes vs Gen 3, 16 lanes
• Integrated graphics: Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU vs UHD Graphics 630
• Release date: the i5-1130G7 launched later, in September 2020, versus April 2018 for the i5-8400T
• Production status: Active vs End-of-life
• Die size: recorded for the i5-8400T at 154 mm²; not recorded for the i5-1130G7
• Part number: SR3X6 for the i5-8400T; not listed for the i5-1130G7

Both support dual-channel DDR4, lack ECC, and have locked multipliers. The i5-8400T carries a launch MSRP of $182.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every recorded test goes the same way. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-1130G7 scores 706 against 633, an 11.5 percent win. Cinebench R15 single-core reads 99 to 89, 11.2 percent in Tiger Lake's favor. Cinebench R20 multi-core: 2942 to 2638, 11.5 percent. Cinebench R20 single-core: 415 to 372, 11.6 percent. The pattern completes in Cinebench R23, where the i5-1130G7 posts 7006 versus 6282 in multi-core (11.5 percent) and 989 versus 886 in single-core (11.6 percent).

The uniformity of those deltas is the analytically interesting part. When a chip wins single-core and multi-core by nearly the same percentage, it means the advantage comes from core-level throughput rather than thread count or scheduling behavior. The i5-1130G7's Willow Cove cores are simply faster per thread, and its SMT doubles the thread pool, so the six Coffee Lake cores never find a workload where their extra physical cores can claw anything back. Context from the database reinforces the scale: the i5-1130G7's average score of 2026 places it in a rival cluster with the Intel Core i5-1145GRE (2025, delta 0.1 percent), Xeon E3-1260L v5 (2029), Xeon E3-1280 v5 (2029), and Xeon E3-1240 v5 (2030). The i5-8400T's 2001 average sits beside the AMD Ryzen 7 2800H at 2002, effectively identical. Note that the i5-8400T also has Geekbench results on file, 1100 single-core and 4011 multi-core, but there is no corresponding Geekbench entry for the i5-1130G7, so no cross-test comparison is possible there.

The Verdict

On the recorded data, the Intel Core i5-1130G7 is the better-performing processor, full stop. It sweeps all six Cinebench comparisons by roughly eleven and a half percent, delivers more memory bandwidth, supports PCIe Gen 4, and does all of it within a 15-watt TDP from a newer 10 nm process. Anyone choosing strictly on measured performance, single-core responsiveness, or multi-core rendering throughput should pick the i5-1130G7.

The case for the i5-8400T is platform-shaped, not performance-shaped. It belongs to a socketed desktop platform, Socket 1151, where the i5-1130G7 is soldered to BGA 1598 and confined to mobile systems. It offers two more physical cores, a marginally larger L3 pool, and a 154 mm² die on a mature node. Both CPUs occupy the same 45th percentile band against the full database, so neither is a performance outlier; the i5-8400T simply loses every direct measurement while offering a replaceable, desktop-only form factor. For buyers prioritizing raw benchmark results, the data renders a one-sided verdict in favor of the Tiger Lake chip.