Intel Core i5-2450P vs Intel Core i7-2670QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a decisive sweep for the Intel Core i5-2450P across every single benchmark in this comparison. The i7-2670QM does not win a single test, with the i5-2450P claiming all seven head-to-head matchups. The margins are remarkably consistent, which suggests a systematic advantage rather than workload-specific quirks.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-2450P scores 366 against the i7-2670QM's 320, a 12.6% advantage. The Cinebench R20 multicore test shows the same pattern: 1525 versus 1334, again a 12.5% gap. Cinebench R23 multicore continues the trend with 3632 against 3177, a 12.5% lead. These three render workloads tell a uniform story: the desktop chip is roughly one-eighth faster in multi-threaded tasks, despite having half the threads.

Single-core performance shows a similar edge. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-2450P scores 215 versus 188, a 12.6% margin. Cinebench R23 single-core records 512 against 448, a 12.5% lead. Geekbench single-core narrows the gap somewhat, with 590 versus 556, a 5.8% difference. The smaller delta in Geekbench hints that the single-core advantage is not purely clock-driven, as the boost clocks differ by less than 13%.

Geekbench multicore lands between the Cinebench and single-core extremes. The i5-2450P scores 1796 versus 1646, an 8.4% margin. Interestingly, this is the smallest multicore gap in the dataset, which suggests that the i7-2670QM's extra threads partially compensate for its lower clock speeds in this particular workload. The thread advantage narrows the deficit but cannot erase it.

The average benchmark scores place the two processors close together: 1096 for the i7-2670QM and 1086 for the i5-2450P. That 0.9% difference in the aggregate hides the fact that the i5-2450P wins every individual test. The i7-2670QM sits at the 31st percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the i5-2450P sits at the 30th. These percentile rankings are nearly identical, which is striking given the consistent benchmark superiority of the i5-2450P.

The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce the picture. The i7-2670QM's closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-2710QE with an identical average score of 1096, followed by the Core i5-3470S at 1095 (0.1% behind), the AMD PRO A10-8850B at 1098 (0.1% ahead), and the Core i7-4610M at 1094 (0.2% behind). The i5-2450P's nearest rivals include the Core i3-6320 at 1085 (0.1% behind), the Core i5-3350P at 1088 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Athlon 220GE at 1088 (0.2% ahead), and the Core i5-2320 at 1083 (0.3% behind). Both chips cluster tightly with their peers, yet head-to-head the i5-2450P is clearly faster in every measured test.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to one conclusion: the Intel Core i5-2450P is the faster processor in this comparison. It wins all seven head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 5.8% to 12.6%. The multicore Cinebench results are particularly telling, as they show the i5-2450P maintaining a 12.5% lead even though the i7-2670QM has eight threads versus its four. The extra threads help the i7-2670QM close the gap in Geekbench multicore, where the deficit shrinks to 8.4%, but the i5-2450P still wins.

Who should pick each chip depends on context beyond raw speed. The i7-2670QM is a mobile processor with a 45 watt TDP and integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics, making it suited for laptop scenarios where power draw and built-in display output matter. The i5-2450P is a desktop part with a 95 watt TDP and no integrated graphics, meaning it requires a discrete GPU and is designed for stationary systems where power efficiency is less critical. The i5-2450P offers higher clock speeds and consistent benchmark wins, while the i7-2670QM offers Hyper-Threading, a lower power envelope, and integrated graphics.

For users prioritizing raw performance in rendering and general compute, the data favors the i5-2450P. For users needing a mobile-capable processor with integrated graphics and lower power consumption, the i7-2670QM is the only option that fits those constraints. Neither chip is unlocked for overclocking, so the recorded frequencies are the maximum achievable without external manipulation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i5-2450P scores 3632 versus the i7-2670QM's 3177, a 12.5% advantage.

Q: Does the i7-2670QM's extra threads help it win any benchmark?

A: No. The i7-2670QM has 8 threads versus the i5-2450P's 4, but it still loses all seven head-to-head tests. The smallest multicore deficit is 8.4% in Geekbench multicore.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Geekbench single-core, the i5-2450P scores 590 against 556, a 5.8% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the margin is 12.5% with 512 versus 448.

Q: Do these processors have the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use Sandy Bridge architecture, are built on a 32 nm process at Intel, and share the same 1,160 million transistor count and 216 mm² die size.

Q: Do either of these chips support overclocking?

A: No, both have a locked multiplier, so their recorded base and boost clocks are fixed.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: The i7-2670QM includes Intel HD 3000 graphics, while the i5-2450P has no integrated graphics at all.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge in several fundamental specifications. The i7-2670QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i5-2450P has 4 cores and 4 threads. This thread difference is the most consequential architectural split, as it gives the mobile chip parallel execution capacity that the desktop chip lacks.

Clock speeds tell the opposite story. The i7-2670QM runs at a 2.20 GHz base clock and 3.10 GHz boost clock. The i5-2450P runs at 3.20 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. The desktop chip enjoys a substantial frequency advantage at both ends, which explains its benchmark superiority.

Power consumption differs significantly. The i7-2670QM has a 45 watt TDP, while the i5-2450P has a 95 watt TDP. This more than doubling of thermal headroom reflects the desktop versus mobile design goals. The socket types also differ: the i7-2670QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B) for laptops, while the i5-2450P uses Intel Socket 1155 for desktop motherboards.

Integrated graphics separate the two as well. The i7-2670QM includes Intel HD 3000, while the i5-2450P has no integrated graphics. The i5-2450P compensates with PCIe Gen 3 support with 16 lanes (CPU only), a feature not listed for the i7-2670QM. Memory support is listed as DDR3 for the i5-2450P, while no memory type is specified for the i7-2670QM; both use dual-channel memory buses.

The market segments differ by design: the i7-2670QM is a mobile part, while the i5-2450P is a desktop part. Release dates also differ, with the i7-2670QM launching on 2011-10-11 and the i5-2450P on 2012-01-29. Part numbers distinguish them: SR02N for the i7-2670QM and SR0G1 for the i5-2450P. The i7-2670QM is marked as end-of-life, while no production status is recorded for the i5-2450P.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Sandy Bridge architecture, the Sandy Bridge codename, and a 32 nm process node from Intel. The transistor count is identical at 1,160 million, and the die size is the same at 216 mm². The cache hierarchy matches exactly: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

The generation labels differ only in branding: the i7-2670QM is listed as Core i7 (Sandy Bridge) and the i5-2450P as Core i5 (Sandy Bridge). This is a product-tier distinction rather than a microarchitectural one. The fundamental silicon is the same, which explains why performance differences track clock speed and thread count so closely.

The key architectural differentiator is Hyper-Threading. The i7-2670QM supports 8 threads from 4 cores, while the i5-2450P runs 4 threads from 4 cores. This feature allows the i7-2670QM to present more logical processors to the operating system, which can improve throughput in heavily threaded workloads. The benchmark data, however, shows that this advantage is insufficient to overcome the i5-2450P's higher clocks.

The integrated graphics presence on the i7-2670QM adds a GPU block to the die, while the i5-2450P omits it entirely. This is not just a feature difference; it affects power distribution and thermal behavior. The i5-2450P's PCIe Gen 3 support with 16 CPU-only lanes suggests a more direct path for discrete graphics, which aligns with its lack of an iGPU.

ECC memory is not supported by either processor. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The absence of memory bandwidth figures in the database means clock speed and thread count remain the primary explanatory variables for the observed benchmark deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-2450P wins every measured benchmark, so the question becomes where the i7-2670QM can claim any advantage at all. The data does not show a single test where the i7-2670QM comes out ahead. Its wins are contextual rather than numerical: it offers a lower TDP of 45 watts versus 95 watts, which matters for thermal-constrained environments. It includes integrated graphics, meaning a system can output video without a discrete GPU. Its mobile socket and market segment make it usable in laptops where the i5-2450P cannot physically fit.

The i5-2450P's wins are unambiguous in compute performance. It leads by 12.6% in Cinebench R15 multicore, 12.5% in Cinebench R20 multicore, 12.5% in Cinebench R23 multicore, 12.6% in Cinebench R20 single-core, 12.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core, 8.4% in Geekbench multicore, and 5.8% in Geekbench single-core. These margins are consistent enough to suggest that any multi-threaded or single-threaded workload will favor the desktop chip.

For users running rendering workloads, video encoding, or CPU-bound gaming, the i5-2450P is the clear choice based on the recorded scores. For users building compact mobile systems or needing integrated display output, the i7-2670QM is the only viable option despite its slower benchmark results. The i5-2450P's lack of integrated graphics means it cannot operate without a discrete GPU, which adds system cost and complexity. The i7-2670QM's Hyper-Threading may help in specific parallel workloads, but the data shows it does not translate into a win in any of the seven tests recorded.

The percentile rankings place both chips within 1 point of each other, which indicates that in the broader CPU landscape, they occupy similar tiers. The head-to-head data, however, reveals a consistent and repeatable performance gap in favor of the i5-2450P.