Intel Core i5-2300 vs Intel Core i5-2500S Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i5-2300 has a base clock of 2.80 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-2500S runs at 2.70 GHz.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500S boosts higher at 3.70 GHz, compared to the Intel Core i5-2300's 3.10 GHz.

Q: How do the thermal design power (TDP) ratings differ?

A: The Intel Core i5-2300 has a TDP of 95 W, whereas the Intel Core i5-2500S draws significantly less at 65 W, indicating the latter prioritizes energy efficiency.

Q: Which CPU has a better average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-2300 posts an average benchmark score of 1014, edging out the Intel Core i5-2500S which records 1004.

Q: Do the two processors share the same cache configuration?

A: Yes, both feature 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which CPU wins in the head-to-head benchmark suite?

A: The Intel Core i5-2300 wins all five recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core i5-2500S winning none.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Sandy Bridge architecture family, manufactured on Intel's 32 nm process node. They share the same codename, "Sandy Bridge," and are built on the same foundry with 1,160 million transistors and a die size of 216 mm². The fundamental architecture is identical: four cores, four threads, and no unlocked multiplier.

The key architectural distinction lies in the clock tuning. The Intel Core i5-2300 operates with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz. The Intel Core i5-2500S, marked with the "S" suffix, is engineered for lower power consumption, running at a 2.70 GHz base but a notably higher 3.70 GHz boost. This inverted clock profile means the 2500S can reach higher single-core frequencies under load but idles at a lower baseline.

Both chips use the same integrated graphics solution, Intel HD 2000, and support DDR3 memory over a dual-channel bus. They share identical PCIe connectivity: Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Cache hierarchies are identical in capacity, with per-core L1 and L2 caches and a shared 6 MB L3 pool. Neither supports ECC memory.

The part numbers differ (SR00D for the 2300, SR009 for the 2500S), reflecting minor stepping or validation differences, but the architectural blueprint is otherwise consistent. The 2500S's higher boost clock is the only performance-oriented divergence, achieved while simultaneously cutting the TDP from 95 W to 65 W. That efficiency gain is the defining architectural trade-off of the "S" variant.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-2300 is the clear winner in multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads as recorded in the Cinebench suite. It takes all five head-to-head benchmarks, including R15 multicore (296 vs 288) and R23 singlecore (416 vs 404). The 2300 also holds a superior average benchmark score of 1014 against the 2500S's 1004. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in rendering, encoding, or general productivity, the 2300 is the stronger pick.

The Intel Core i5-2500S, despite losing every benchmark, offers a different kind of advantage: power efficiency. With a 65 W TDP versus 95 W, it consumes roughly one-third less power at the package level. This makes it more suitable for compact desktops, HTPCs, or systems where thermal output and electricity consumption are paramount. Its higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz also suggests it can burst to higher frequencies in lightly threaded scenarios, even though the recorded Cinebench single-core scores do not reflect a win.

In the database's percentile rankings, the 2300 sits at the 28th percentile of all CPUs, while the 2500S sits at the 27th. This near-identical placement indicates that in practice, the two chips deliver essentially equivalent performance tiers, with the 2300 holding a marginal but consistent edge across the tested workloads.

For anyone choosing between the two, the decision hinges on whether the 30 W power saving of the 2500S outweighs the 2300's slight performance lead. In a desktop where cooling and power budget are unconstrained, the 2300 is the better performer. In a power-sensitive build, the 2500S offers most of the same capability at a fraction of the thermal cost.

Specification Differences

The two processors share most core specifications, so the differences are few but meaningful.

• Base Clock: Intel Core i5-2300 at 2.80 GHz; Intel Core i5-2500S at 2.70 GHz. The 2300 starts 0.10 GHz higher.
• Boost Clock: Intel Core i5-2300 at 3.10 GHz; Intel Core i5-2500S at 3.70 GHz. The 2500S boosts 0.60 GHz higher.
• TDP: Intel Core i5-2300 at 95 W; Intel Core i5-2500S at 65 W. The 2500S consumes 30 W less.
• Part Number: Intel Core i5-2300 as SR00D; Intel Core i5-2500S as SR009.

All other listed specifications match exactly: 4 cores, 4 threads, Sandy Bridge architecture, 32 nm process, 1,160 million transistors, 216 mm² die size, 6 MB shared L3, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, DDR3 dual-channel memory support, Intel HD 2000 graphics, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, Socket 1155, and a release date of January 2011. Both are end-of-life desktop parts with no unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent: the Intel Core i5-2300 wins every test by a narrow margin, never exceeding a 3% delta.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 2300 scores 296 against the 2500S's 288, a 2.8% advantage. This sets the pattern for all subsequent tests. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 1237 vs 1204, a 2.7% lead for the 2300. The single-core tests are slightly more pronounced: R20 singlecore gives the 2300 a 174 to 169 win, a 3% delta, and R23 singlecore repeats the exact same margin at 416 vs 404.

The largest multi-threaded gap appears in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the 2300 scores 2947 versus 2867, again a 2.8% difference. Across all five tests, the 2300's wins range from 2.7% to 3%, indicating a stable, consistent performance advantage rather than a workload-specific fluke.

The 2500S's higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz does not translate into a single-core victory. In both R20 and R23 single-core tests, the 2300's lower 3.10 GHz boost still produces higher scores. This suggests that the 2500S's power-saving design may limit sustained clock behavior in burst workloads, or that the 2300's higher base clock contributes more to steady-state performance than the 2500S's peak boost.

The average benchmark scores corroborate the head-to-head data: 1014 for the 2300 versus 1004 for the 2500S. In the nearest rival comparisons, the 2300 sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core i3-7100H and within 0.3% of the Intel Core i3-4160, while the 2500S matches the Intel Core i5-4300M exactly and trails the Intel Core i7-5600U by just 0.1%.

The data paints a clear picture: the 2300 is the faster chip in every measured scenario, but the 2500S is never far behind. The maximum gap of 3% is well within run-to-run variance for many workloads. Both processors occupy the same performance class, and the 2500S's efficiency advantage is the only substantive differentiator in real-world use.