Intel Core i5-2500S vs Intel Core i7-2675QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a fascinating split between these two Sandy Bridge parts. The Intel Core i7-2675QM wins five of the seven recorded head-to-head tests, yet the Intel Core i5-2500S takes the two most lopsided victories. This is not a simple "one is faster" story; it is a tale of two different performance profiles.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the mobile i7-2675QM establishes a consistent lead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7 scores 314 against the i5's 288, a 9% advantage. That margin is nearly identical in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where 1309 beats 1204 by 8.7%. The R23 multi-core test shows the same pattern: 3118 versus 2867, a 8.8% edge. Even in single-core Cinebench tests, the i7-2675QM holds a surprisingly steady advantage. In Cinebench R20 single-core it posts 184 versus 169, and in R23 single-core it posts 440 versus 404. Both of those are 8.9% wins.

The Geekbench results flip the script dramatically. In Geekbench multi-core, the i5-2500S scores 1511 against the i7's 1301, a 13.9% margin. The single-core Geekbench gap is even larger: 582 versus 415, a 28.7% blowout. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. The i5-2500S is not merely ahead in Geekbench; it is decisively ahead, and the size of that single-core gap demands investigation.

What explains this contradiction? The Cinebench tests reward sustained multi-threaded throughput, while Geekbench's workload mix leans on per-core efficiency and clock speed. The data suggests the i7-2675QM's extra threads matter in Cinebench's render loops, but the i5-2500S's higher clock speeds dominate in Geekbench's more latency-sensitive tasks. The average benchmark scores are close: 1012 for the i7 versus 1004 for the i5, a negligible 0.8% difference. Yet that average hides the fact that these CPUs win in entirely different arenas.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same 32 nm Sandy Bridge architecture, manufactured by Intel, and both pack 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. They share identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. Both are dual-channel memory designs, and neither supports ECC memory. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The fundamental architectural difference is thread count. The i7-2675QM has 4 cores and 8 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading, while the i5-2500S has 4 cores and 4 threads. That is the single biggest factor behind the Cinebench results. The i7 also has a lower base clock of 2.20 GHz versus 2.70 GHz, and a lower boost clock of 3.10 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. Clock speed is the i5's weapon.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i7-2675QM carries Intel HD 3000, while the i5-2500S carries the less capable Intel HD 2000. The i7 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1224, aimed at laptops, while the i5 is a desktop chip on Intel Socket 1155. The i5 supports DDR3 memory and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only); the i7's memory support and PCIe details are not recorded in the database. The i7 has a 45 W TDP, the i5 has a 65 W TDP, which is notable given the i7 is the mobile chip.

The release dates differ by about nine months, with the i5-2500S launching in January 2011 and the i7-2675QM in October 2011. Both are end-of-life products. Neither part number suggests anything exotic; they are standard Sandy Bridge SKUs.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. For multi-threaded rendering workloads, specifically Cinebench, the i7-2675QM is the stronger part. It wins all four Cinebench tests by margins between 8.7% and 9%. The i5-2500S cannot compensate for its missing threads in these heavily parallel workloads, despite its clock advantage.

For single-threaded and Geekbench-style workloads, the i5-2500S is the clear winner. Its 28.7% single-core Geekbench lead is enormous, and its 13.9% multi-core Geekbench lead shows that even in some multi-threaded scenarios, raw clock speed trumps thread count. The i5's 3.70 GHz boost clock versus the i7's 3.10 GHz boost clock is the likely explanation.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical: the i7 sits at the 28th percentile of all CPUs, the i5 at the 27th. Their nearest rivals in the database also tell a similar story. The i7's closest competitor is the Intel Xeon W5580 at a 0% delta, with the i5-2300 just 0.2% behind and the i3-7100H 0.3% ahead. The i5's closest rival is the i5-4300M at 0%, with the i7-5600U and i7-2630QM both 0.1% behind and the AMD FX-9830P 0.2% behind. Both chips sit in a dense cluster of similar-performing CPUs.

The choice between them depends entirely on the workload. The i7-2675QM is the renderer's pick; the i5-2500S is the responsive-desktop pick. Neither is a universal winner, and the average scores reflect that balance.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several recorded specifications. The i7-2675QM has 8 threads, the i5-2500S has 4 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.20 GHz versus 2.70 GHz. Boost clocks differ: 3.10 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. TDP differs: 45 W versus 65 W. The socket differs: Intel BGA 1224 versus Intel Socket 1155. Integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 3000 versus Intel HD 2000. The market segment differs: Mobile versus Desktop. Memory support is listed for the i5 (DDR3) but not recorded for the i7. PCIe is listed for the i5 (Gen 3, 16 lanes, CPU only) but not recorded for the i7. Release dates differ: October 2011 versus January 2011. Part numbers differ: SR02S versus SR009.

Everything else, including architecture, process node, transistor count, die size, L1, L2, and L3 cache, memory bus width, ECC support, and unlocked multiplier status, is identical.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-2675QM has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-2500S has 4 threads. Both have 4 cores.

Q: Why does the i5-2500S win Geekbench multi-core if it has fewer threads?

A: The i5-2500S has a higher base clock (2.70 GHz versus 2.20 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.10 GHz). In Geekbench multi-core, that clock advantage produced a 1511 score versus 1301, a 13.9% margin.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark lead in this comparison?

A: The i5-2500S wins Geekbench single-core by 28.7%, scoring 582 versus the i7-2675QM's 415. That is the biggest delta in the head-to-head data.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same cache configuration?

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

Q: Which CPU belongs to which market segment?

A: The i7-2675QM is a Mobile part on Intel BGA 1224, while the i5-2500S is a Desktop part on Intel Socket 1155.

Q: Are these CPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The i5-2500S was released in January 2011, and the i7-2675QM in October 2011.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-2675QM wins every Cinebench test in the database. That includes Cinebench R15 multi-core (314 versus 288), R20 multi-core (1309 versus 1204), R20 single-core (184 versus 169), R23 multi-core (3118 versus 2867), and R23 single-core (440 versus 404). These are the i7's territories: rendering, video encoding, and any workload that scales with threads. Its 8 threads give it a structural advantage that clock speed alone cannot overcome in these tests. The margins are remarkably consistent, hovering between 8.7% and 9%, which suggests a stable, predictable advantage.

The i5-2500S wins the two Geekbench tests. Its 1511 multi-core score and 582 single-core score are both substantially ahead of the i7's 1301 and 415. The single-core gap of 28.7% is the standout statistic of this entire comparison. The i5 is the better choice for general desktop responsiveness, single-threaded applications, and workloads that are sensitive to clock speed rather than thread count. Its 65 W TDP is higher than the i7's 45 W, but this is a desktop part, so power efficiency is less critical.

The data implies a simple rule: if the workload is Cinebench-like, pick the i7-2675QM; if it is Geekbench-like, pick the i5-2500S. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical (1012 versus 1004), and the percentile rankings are essentially tied (28 versus 27). These are two evenly matched chips with opposite strengths. The i7-2675QM is the multi-threaded specialist, and the i5-2500S is the single-threaded sprinter. Neither can claim overall superiority, and the recorded data supports that split.