Intel Core i5-2500T vs Intel Core i5-3380M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly along a use-case boundary. The Intel Core i5-2500T, a desktop part, and the Intel Core i5-3380M, a mobile part, do not trade victories across different workload types; instead, the i5-3380M wins every single head-to-head test in the database. That is five wins for the mobile chip and zero for the desktop chip.

The i5-3380M takes the lead in both multi-core and single-core Cinebench tests. For multi-threaded workloads, the i5-3380M edges ahead in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, with margins ranging from 0.6% to 0.8%. For single-threaded workloads, the i5-3380M also leads in Cinebench R20 and R23, though the gap is similarly narrow, at 0.6% to 0.7%.

This means the practical use-case split is less about one processor dominating a category and more about the i5-3380M being consistently slightly faster across the board. The i5-2500T does not have a single benchmark where it comes out ahead. If a workload is heavily multi-threaded, such as rendering or video encoding, the i5-3380M still wins, but only by a hair. If a workload is lightly threaded, such as older games or everyday application responsiveness, the i5-3380M again wins by a similar margin.

The data does not show any scenario where the i5-2500T's four physical cores overcome the i5-3380M's two physical cores with four threads. In fact, the i5-3380M's four-thread capability matches or exceeds the i5-2500T's four-thread capability in every recorded test. So the use-case split is not "desktop for multi-core, mobile for single-core"; it is simply "the i5-3380M for everything measured."

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures and target different market segments. The i5-2500T is built on Sandy Bridge with a 32 nm process node, while the i5-3380M is built on Ivy Bridge with a 22 nm node. The i5-3380M therefore uses a newer, denser manufacturing process, which contributes to its lower thermal design power.

The i5-2500T has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, whereas the i5-3380M has 2 physical cores and 4 threads, meaning the mobile chip relies on Hyper-Threading to reach the same thread count as the desktop chip. The i5-2500T carries a 6 MB shared L3 cache, while the i5-3380M has a smaller 3 MB shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core.

The i5-2500T is a desktop part with an Intel Socket 1155, while the i5-3380M is a mobile part with an Intel Socket G2 (988B). The desktop chip also lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the mobile chip has no PCIe data recorded. The i5-2500T's integrated graphics is Intel HD 2000; the i5-3380M's is Intel HD 4000. The i5-3380M's newer iGPU generation is a clear feature advantage.

The i5-2500T has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz, while the i5-3380M has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz and a higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The i5-3380M achieves this with a lower TDP of 35 watts compared to the i5-2500T's 45 watts. The i5-2500T has a transistor count of 1,160 million and a die size of 216 mm²; the i5-3380M has no transistor count recorded but a smaller die size of 118 mm².

Both support DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and neither supports ECC memory. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-2500T is marked end-of-life, while the i5-3380M has no production status recorded. The i5-2500T was released earlier, in January 2011, while the i5-3380M came later, in December 2012.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records five direct comparisons, all in the Cinebench suite. The i5-3380M wins all five, but the margins are consistently tiny.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-2500T scores 250 and the i5-3380M scores 252. The i5-3380M wins by 0.8%. This is the largest margin in the entire head-to-head set.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i5-2500T scores 1045 and the i5-3380M scores 1051. The i5-3380M wins by 0.6%. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-2500T scores 147 and the i5-3380M scores 148, a 0.7% win for the mobile chip.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-2500T scores 2489 and the i5-3380M scores 2504, a 0.6% margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-2500T scores 351 and the i5-3380M scores 353, again a 0.6% margin.

The pattern is uniform: the i5-3380M leads by less than a full percentage point in every test. These are not dramatic victories; they are consistent, small advantages. The i5-3380M also has two additional Geekbench results that the i5-2500T lacks: a multi-core score of 1055 and a single-core score of 505. Those numbers cannot be compared directly since the i5-2500T has no Geekbench entries, but they do show the i5-3380M performing at a level consistent with its Cinebench wins.

The average benchmark score puts the i5-2500T at 856 and the i5-3380M at 838, which is a reversal of the head-to-head results. The i5-2500T sits in the 23rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-3380M sits in the 22nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the i5-2500T include the Intel Core i5-5250U (delta 0.1%), Intel Core i7-4500U (delta -0.4%), AMD A8-7650K (delta -0.5%), and Intel Xeon X5492 (delta 0.5%). The nearest rivals for the i5-3380M include the Intel Core i5-5200U (delta 0.1%), Intel Xeon X3450 (delta 0.1%), Intel Xeon X5470 (delta -0.2%), and Intel Core i7-920 (delta -0.3%).

These percentile and rival data indicate that both processors sit in a similar performance tier, within a fraction of a percent of their closest competitors. The i5-2500T's higher average score is driven by its broader benchmark set, not by superior head-to-head performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-3380M wins every multi-core test in the database. In Cinebench R15, it scores 252 versus 250 for the i5-2500T. In R20, it scores 1051 versus 1045. In R23, it scores 2504 versus 2489.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i5-3380M has both a higher base clock (2.90 GHz versus 2.30 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.30 GHz) than the i5-2500T.

Q: Does the i5-2500T's four physical cores give it an advantage?

A: No. Despite having 4 physical cores versus the i5-3380M's 2 physical cores and 4 threads, the i5-2500T loses every recorded benchmark to the i5-3380M.

Q: What are the integrated graphics differences?

A: The i5-2500T uses Intel HD 2000, while the i5-3380M uses Intel HD 4000. The i5-3380M has the newer integrated graphics generation.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The i5-3380M has a lower TDP of 35 watts, while the i5-2500T has a higher TDP of 45 watts. The i5-3380M also uses a newer 22 nm process versus the i5-2500T's 32 nm process.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the i5-2500T wins?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the i5-2500T and five wins for the i5-3380M across all head-to-head tests.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-2500T | Intel Core i5-3380M |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1155 | Intel Socket G2 (988B) |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Ivy Bridge |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | 1,160 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 216 mm² | 118 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 3 MB (shared) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2000 | Intel HD 4000 |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Not recorded |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2011-01-08 | 2012-12-31 |

| Part Number | SR00A | SR0X7 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i5-3380M is the faster processor in every measured workload. It wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, with margins between 0.6% and 0.8%. It also has a higher base clock and boost clock, a lower TDP, and a newer integrated graphics unit.

The i5-2500T's advantages are structural rather than performance-based. It has more physical cores (4 versus 2), a larger L3 cache (6 MB versus 3 MB), and a desktop socket with PCIe Gen 3 support. It also has a slightly higher average benchmark score (856 versus 838) and a marginally higher percentile ranking (23rd versus 22nd), but those figures come from different benchmark sets and do not reflect the direct head-to-head results.

For a user choosing between these two, the i5-3380M is the pick if the priority is raw performance, lower power draw, or better integrated graphics. The i5-2500T would only make sense if the user specifically needs a desktop platform with a PCIe Gen 3 x16 slot or requires more physical cores for a workload that does not benefit from Hyper-Threading. The data does not show any performance scenario where the i5-2500T comes out ahead.

The i5-3380M's wins are narrow, so neither chip offers a dramatic performance leap over the other. But the i5-3380M does offer those wins while consuming less power and using a newer manufacturing process. The verdict from the recorded data is clear: the i5-3380M is the better performer in this comparison.