Intel Core i5-11500H vs Intel Core i5-12500TE Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11500H and Intel Core i5-12500TE are both 6-core, 12-thread processors that occupy the same performance percentile, yet they deliver their performance in very different ways. The data shows a clear split: the i5-11500H dominates in Cinebench workloads, while the i5-12500TE takes a decisive lead in Geekbench tests. This contrast makes the choice between them entirely dependent on which benchmark suite best represents the user's actual workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unusually polarized. The i5-11500H wins six of the eight benchmark comparisons, with all Cinebench victories falling in a narrow range. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-11500H scores 1427 against 1330 for the i5-12500TE, a 7.3% advantage. The single-core R15 result is nearly identical in percentage terms: 201 versus 187, a 7.5% edge. This pattern repeats across every Cinebench iteration. R20 multicore shows 5949 versus 5545 (7.3%), R20 single-core shows 839 versus 782 (7.3%), and R23 multicore shows 14166 versus 13203 (7.3%). Even the R23 single-core test, with scores of 1999 and 1863, lands at exactly 7.3%. The consistency of this delta across all six Cinebench tests suggests a fundamental architectural advantage for the i5-11500H in this rendering workload, rather than a test-specific quirk.

The story reverses completely in Geekbench. The i5-12500TE scores 7781 in multicore, beating the i5-11500H's 7135 by 8.3%. The single-core gap is even larger: 1976 versus 1778, a 10% advantage for the i5-12500TE. This is a substantial reversal. The i5-11500H's 7.3% Cinebench lead becomes a 10% deficit in Geekbench single-core, indicating that the two processors have radically different performance profiles. The i5-11500H's overall average benchmark score is 4187, slightly higher than the i5-12500TE's 4083, but this aggregate figure masks the fact that neither processor is uniformly faster.

Looking at broader context, both CPUs sit at the 57th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall ranking. The i5-11500H's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9900 (average score 4163, delta 0.6%) and the Intel Core i5-12500T (4216, delta -0.7%), while the i5-12500TE's rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X (4073, delta 0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HS (4121, delta -0.9%). These proximity values confirm that both chips are firmly in the same performance class, despite their divergent benchmark results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use different core architectures. The i5-11500H is based on Tiger Lake-H, a 10nm mobile design with a die size of 190 mm². The i5-12500TE is based on Alder Lake-S, also on a 10nm process, but with a smaller 163 mm² die. Both use Intel as the foundry, but the underlying designs differ significantly.

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The i5-11500H has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The i5-12500TE has a base clock of 1900.00 MHz (1.90 GHz) and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The i5-11500H runs at a higher base frequency by 500 MHz, which explains its Cinebench advantage, as that workload tends to scale with sustained clock speeds. The i5-12500TE's lower base clock is compensated by its newer architecture, which appears to provide better single-thread performance per clock cycle, as evidenced by its Geekbench wins.

Cache configuration also differs. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache is not equal. The i5-11500H has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-12500TE has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This 6 MB difference in L3 cache likely contributes to the i5-12500TE's superior Geekbench performance, as that benchmark often benefits from larger cache sizes.

Memory support sets them apart further. The i5-11500H supports DDR4 only, while the i5-12500TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The i5-11500H has a specified memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the i5-12500TE's memory bandwidth is not provided in the data. Both use dual-channel memory buses. PCIe support also differs: the i5-11500H offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-12500TE offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics are different. The i5-11500H pairs with UHD Graphics 750, while the i5-12500TE uses UHD Graphics 770. The market segments differ as well: the i5-11500H is classified as a mobile processor with an Intel BGA 1787 socket, while the i5-12500TE is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1700.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-11500H has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-12500TE has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The i5-12500TE has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, which is 6 MB more than the i5-11500H's 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor performs better in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The i5-11500H scores 14166 in Cinebench R23 multicore, which is 7.3% higher than the i5-12500TE's score of 13203.

Q: Does the i5-12500TE support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the i5-12500TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the i5-11500H supports DDR4 only.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The i5-11500H has an average benchmark score of 4187, while the i5-12500TE has an average score of 4083, a difference of 104 points in favor of the i5-11500H.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the i5-11500H and the i5-12500TE are at the 57th percentile of all CPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-11500H | Intel Core i5-12500TE |

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

| Series | Core 11th Gen | Core 12th Gen |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 1900.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1787 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Tiger Lake | Alder Lake |

| Codename | Tiger Lake-H | Alder Lake-S |

| Die Size | 190 mm² | 163 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | Not specified |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2021-05-10 | Not specified |

| Launch MSRP | $250 | Not specified |

| Part Number | SRKT2 | Not specified |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear decision framework based on workload. The Intel Core i5-11500H is the better choice for Cinebench-style rendering tasks. It holds a consistent 7.3% advantage across all six Cinebench tests, from R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core modes. This consistency is notable and suggests that the i5-11500H's higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz provides a tangible benefit in sustained rendering workloads. The i5-11500H also has a higher average benchmark score (4187 versus 4083) and sits at the same 57th percentile as its rival.

The Intel Core i5-12500TE is the better choice for Geekbench-style workloads, which often reflect general-purpose computing and single-threaded applications. It wins Geekbench multicore by 8.3% and Geekbench single-core by 10%. The i5-12500TE also offers a more modern feature set: support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, Gen 5 PCIe, a larger 18 MB L3 cache, and a newer integrated GPU (UHD Graphics 770). Its desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700) may be more relevant for users building or upgrading a desktop system, while the i5-11500H's mobile socket (Intel BGA 1787) ties it to laptops or embedded mobile designs.

Neither processor is a universal winner. The i5-11500H's Cinebench dominance is offset by the i5-12500TE's Geekbench superiority. Users who prioritize rendering performance should choose the i5-11500H. Users who prioritize general-purpose performance, memory flexibility, or a desktop platform should choose the i5-12500TE. The i5-11500H also carries a launch MSRP of $250, which is the only pricing data available. The final decision rests on whether the user's workloads align with Cinebench or Geekbench, as the 7.3% to 10% swings in either direction are significant enough to matter in real-world use.