Intel Core i5-2500S vs Intel Core i7-5600U Comparison

The Intel Core i7-5600U and Intel Core i5-2500S occupy the same 27th percentile ranking among all CPUs, yet their benchmark profiles tell divergent stories. The i5-2500S wins five of seven head-to-head tests, but the i7-5600U’s two victories are decisive, particularly in Geekbench single-core where it leads by 57.6%. This is a contest between a 14 nm mobile part with 2 cores and 4 threads and a 32 nm desktop part with 4 cores and 4 threads, and the data shows that neither chip dominates universally.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i5-2500S establishes a consistent lead across Cinebench workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-2500S scores 288 against 255 for the i7-5600U, a delta of -11.5% from the perspective of the i7-5600U. That same -11.5% margin repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where scores are 1204 and 1065 respectively. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with the i5-2500S posting 2867 versus 2537, again an -11.5% gap. These consistent multi-core margins indicate that the i5-2500S’s two additional physical cores provide a structural advantage in thread-scaled rendering workloads, even though the i7-5600U has Hyper-Threading to double its thread count to four.

Single-core Cinebench results also favor the i5-2500S, though by a slightly narrower margin. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-2500S scores 169 against 150, a -11.2% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 404 for the i5-2500S versus 358 for the i7-5600U, a -11.4% difference. These results are notable because the i7-5600U has a higher base clock (2.60 GHz) and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, while the i5-2500S runs at 2.70 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. Despite having a lower process node (14 nm versus 32 nm) and newer architecture (Broadwell versus Sandy Bridge), the i7-5600U cannot overcome the i5-2500S’s higher maximum clock speed in these Cinebench single-threaded tests.

The i7-5600U fights back decisively in Geekbench. In Geekbench multi-core, the i7-5600U scores 1750 against 1511, a 15.8% advantage. Even more striking is Geekbench single-core, where the i7-5600U scores 917 against 582, a 57.6% lead. This is the largest margin in the entire comparison. The Geekbench single-core gap is over five times larger than the Cinebench single-core gap, suggesting that the i7-5600U’s Broadwell architecture excels at the specific instruction mix used by Geekbench, while the i5-2500S’s higher clocks dominate the Cinebench workload. The divergence between benchmark suites is substantial: the i5-2500S leads Cinebench by roughly 11% across the board, but the i7-5600U leads Geekbench multi-core by nearly 16% and single-core by nearly 58%.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by workload type. For users running Cinebench-style rendering tasks—characterized by sustained multi-threaded computation and single-threaded ray tracing—the i5-2500S is the stronger choice. It wins all five Cinebench tests, and its margins are consistent at -11.5% in multi-core and -11.2% to -11.4% in single-core. The i5-2500S also has a higher average benchmark score (1004 versus 1005, effectively tied) despite the i7-5600U’s Geekbench wins, which reflects the higher number of Cinebench tests in the dataset.

For users whose primary applications resemble Geekbench—general-purpose computing, web browsing, office productivity, and light content creation—the i7-5600U is the better performer. Its 57.6% single-core advantage in Geekbench is the single most decisive number in this comparison, and its 15.8% multi-core lead in that suite shows that architectural efficiency can overcome core-count disadvantages in certain workloads. The i7-5600U also carries a 15 W TDP versus 65 W for the i5-2500S, which matters for mobile deployments. The i5-2500S is a desktop chip on Socket 1155, while the i7-5600U is a mobile chip on BGA 1168, so the intended form factor largely dictates the choice.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras of Intel design. The i7-5600U uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-U, built on a 14 nm process node with 1,300 million transistors on an 82 mm² die. The i5-2500S uses Sandy Bridge, built on a 32 nm process with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i7-5600U’s transistor density is far higher—1,300 million transistors in less than half the die area—which explains its ability to deliver competitive or superior performance in certain tests while consuming only 15 W.

The i5-2500S compensates with a larger shared L3 cache: 6 MB versus 4 MB. Both chips have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. The i7-5600U supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s; the i5-2500S also supports DDR3 dual-channel, but the FACT PACK does not list a memory bandwidth figure for it. The i7-5600U uses PCIe Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-2500S uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i5-2500S’s PCIe Gen 3 support is a generational advantage for expansion bandwidth, though the i7-5600U’s mobile context typically does not require as many lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well: the i7-5600U ships with Intel HD 5500, while the i5-2500S has Intel HD 2000. The FACT PACK provides no graphics benchmarks, so the comparison is limited to feature presence. Both chips are end-of-life and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i7-5600U has a launch MSRP of $393, while the i5-2500S has no launch MSRP listed in the data.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most fundamental difference: the i7-5600U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i5-2500S has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i5-2500S has a higher base clock (2.70 GHz versus 2.60 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.20 GHz). TDP differs significantly: 15 W for the i7-5600U versus 65 W for the i5-2500S. Sockets are incompatible: BGA 1168 for the mobile chip, Socket 1155 for the desktop chip.

Process node and die size differ: 14 nm and 82 mm² for the i7-5600U, 32 nm and 216 mm² for the i5-2500S. Transistor counts are 1,300 million versus 1,160 million. L3 cache is 4 MB for the i7-5600U and 6 MB for the i5-2500S. PCIe generation and lane count differ: Gen 2 with 12 lanes versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i7-5600U has a listed memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s; the i5-2500S has no such figure. Release dates are separated by roughly four years: the i7-5600U launched on 2015-02-28, and the i5-2500S on 2011-01-08. Part numbers are SR23V and SR009, respectively. The i7-5600U has a launch MSRP of $393; the i5-2500S has none listed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500S has 4 physical cores, while the Intel Core i7-5600U has 2 physical cores. Both have 4 threads total, with the i7-5600U relying on Hyper-Threading to double its core count.

Q: How much faster is the i7-5600U in Geekbench single-core?

A: The i7-5600U scores 917 in Geekbench single-core versus 582 for the i5-2500S, a 57.6% advantage. This is the largest performance gap in any benchmark between the two chips.

Q: Does the i5-2500S win any multi-core tests?

A: Yes, the i5-2500S wins all multi-core Cinebench tests: R15 (288 vs 255), R20 (1204 vs 1065), and R23 (2867 vs 2537), each by -11.5% from the i7-5600U’s perspective. However, the i7-5600U wins Geekbench multi-core (1750 vs 1511, a 15.8% lead).

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The i7-5600U has a TDP of 15 W, while the i5-2500S has a TDP of 65 W. This makes the i7-5600U substantially more power-efficient, consistent with its mobile market segment.

Q: Which chip supports PCIe Gen 3?

A: The i5-2500S supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i7-5600U is limited to PCIe Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-5600U has an average benchmark score of 1005, and the i5-2500S has an average of 1004. They are effectively tied, with the i5-2500S listed as a nearest rival to the i7-5600U at a delta of -0.1%.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-2500S wins in all Cinebench scenarios. This includes Cinebench R15 multi-core, Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core, and Cinebench R23 multi-core and single-core. The margins are consistent between -11.2% and -11.5%, indicating that the i5-2500S’s four physical cores and higher clock speeds (2.70 GHz base, 3.70 GHz boost) provide a reliable advantage across the entire Cinebench suite. For rendering workloads, video encoding, or any application that scales with Cinebench’s threading model, the i5-2500S is the superior chip.

The i7-5600U wins in Geekbench, both multi-core and single-core. The multi-core win (1750 vs 1511, 15.8%) shows that the i7-5600U’s two Broadwell cores with Hyper-Threading can outperform four Sandy Bridge cores in that workload. The single-core win (917 vs 582, 57.6%) is the standout result, likely reflecting the i7-5600U’s newer architecture and higher instructions-per-clock efficiency. For general-purpose computing, web applications, and single-threaded productivity tasks, the i7-5600U delivers significantly better responsiveness despite its lower clock speeds.

The i7-5600U also wins on power efficiency and form factor. Its 15 W TDP versus 65 W means it can be deployed in thin-and-light laptops, while the i5-2500S requires a desktop platform. The i7-5600U’s newer integrated graphics (Intel HD 5500 versus Intel HD 2000) further favors mobile use cases, though no graphics benchmarks are available in the data. The i5-2500S counters with a larger 6 MB L3 cache and PCIe Gen 3 support, which may matter for desktop expansion cards and storage. For a mobile user prioritizing Geekbench-style performance and battery life, the i7-5600U is the clear choice; for a desktop user prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering throughput, the i5-2500S wins.