Intel Core i5-2500T vs Intel Core i5-5200U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-2500T sweeps every recorded Cinebench comparison against the Intel Core i5-5200U. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the 2500T scores 1045 against 892 for the 5200U, a 17.2% advantage. Single-core results follow the same pattern: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the 2500T posts 147 versus 126, a 16.7% lead. The 2500T also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 17.1% (2489 to 2125) and single-core by 17% (351 to 300). The smallest recorded gap is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the 2500T leads 250 to 214, a 16.8% difference.

Across all five head-to-head benchmarks, the 2500T wins 5 and the 5200U wins 0. The deltas are remarkably consistent, ranging from 16.7% to 17.2%, which suggests a stable performance advantage rather than a workload-specific edge. The average benchmark score reflects this: the 2500T sits at 856, while the 5200U trails at 838. In percentile terms, the 2500T ranks in the 23rd percentile of all CPUs, while the 5200U lands at the 22nd percentile, a narrow but real gap.

The 2500T's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-5250U (avg score 856, delta 0.1%) and the Intel Core i7-4500U (avg score 859, delta -0.4%). The 5200U's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-3380M (avg score 838, delta 0%) and the Intel Xeon X3450 (avg score 837, delta 0.1%). These comparisons place both chips in similar overall performance territory, but the head-to-head data shows the 2500T consistently ahead of the 5200U by a double-digit percentage.

Where Each One Wins

The 2500T wins in every recorded benchmark category. Multi-core rendering favors it heavily: Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 17.1% lead, and Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 17.2% lead. These results indicate the 2500T's four physical cores provide a measurable advantage in heavily threaded workloads, even though both processors support four threads total. The 2500T also wins single-core tests by 16.7% to 17%, which is notable because the 5200U has a higher base clock (2.20 GHz versus 2.30 GHz) but a lower boost clock (2.70 GHz versus 3.30 GHz). The 2500T's higher boost clock appears to translate directly into single-thread performance gains.

The 5200U does not win any recorded benchmark. However, its profile still supports certain use cases. It has a 15 W TDP versus the 2500T's 45 W TDP, and it belongs to a later generation (Broadwell-U versus Sandy Bridge). The 5200U also includes Intel HD 5500 integrated graphics, while the 2500T uses Intel HD 2000. For tasks that rely on the integrated GPU or require a low-power mobile platform, the 5200U holds an advantage that the benchmark scores do not capture. The recorded data only covers Cinebench and Geekbench tests, so the 5200U's wins would appear in power efficiency and graphics scenarios, not in the CPU-bound tests listed here.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The 2500T uses Sandy Bridge on a 32 nm process node, with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The 5200U uses Broadwell on a 14 nm process node, with 1,300 million transistors on an 82 mm² die. The 5200U packs more transistors into a much smaller area, a direct result of the newer manufacturing process. The 2500T has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the 5200U has 2 cores and 4 threads, meaning the 2500T offers more physical cores despite being older.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The 2500T provides 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 5200U provides only 3 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, so the per-core cache structure is identical; the difference lies in the shared L3 capacity. The 2500T's larger L3 cache likely contributes to its multi-core performance advantage, especially in rendering workloads that benefit from shared data.

Memory support is limited to DDR3 for both, with dual-channel memory buses. The 5200U explicitly lists a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the 2500T does not have a recorded bandwidth figure. PCIe support differs: the 2500T uses Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 5200U uses Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The 2500T's newer PCIe generation and higher lane count make it more suitable for discrete GPUs or high-bandwidth peripherals.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The 2500T ships with Intel HD 2000, while the 5200U includes Intel HD 5500. The 5200U's graphics solution is newer and more capable, though the benchmark data does not include graphics tests. The 2500T is a desktop part on Socket 1155, while the 5200U is a mobile part on BGA 1168. The 2500T supports no ECC memory, and neither does the 5200U. Both have locked multipliers, and both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i5-2500T scores 2489, while the Intel Core i5-5200U scores 2125. The 2500T leads by 17.1%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-5200U win any of the recorded head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No. The 2500T wins all five Cinebench comparisons, with deltas ranging from 16.7% to 17.2%. The 5200U has zero wins in the head-to-head data.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The 2500T wins both recorded single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 147 versus 126 for the 5200U, a 16.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 351 versus 300, a 17% lead.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The 2500T has 4 cores and 4 threads. The 5200U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The 2500T has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 5200U has 3 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The 2500T has a TDP of 45 W, while the 5200U has a TDP of 15 W. The 5200U is designed for lower power consumption.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-2500T | Intel Core i5-5200U |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1155 | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Broadwell |

| Codename | Sandy Bridge | Broadwell-U |

| Generation | Core i5 (Sandy Bridge) | Core i5 (Broadwell-U) |

| Process node | 32 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 1,160 million | 1,300 million |

| Die size | 216 mm² | 82 mm² |

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

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 25.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 2000 | Intel HD 5500 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2011-01-08 | 2015-02-28 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $281 |

| Part number | SR00A | SR23Y |

The Verdict

The recorded data points decisively toward the Intel Core i5-2500T for raw CPU performance. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by roughly 17%, and its average benchmark score of 856 exceeds the 5200U's 838. The 2500T also holds advantages in core count (4 versus 2), L3 cache (6 MB versus 3 MB), boost clock (3.30 GHz versus 2.70 GHz), and PCIe generation (Gen 3 versus Gen 2). For desktop users who prioritize multi-threaded rendering or single-thread responsiveness, the 2500T is the clear choice.

The 5200U, however, is not without merit. Its 15 W TDP is one-third of the 2500T's 45 W TDP, making it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops or fanless designs. It also integrates newer graphics (Intel HD 5500 versus Intel HD 2000) and supports a higher memory bandwidth rating of 25.6 GB/s. Its smaller die size (82 mm² versus 216 mm²) and newer 14 nm process reflect a more modern manufacturing approach. For mobile workloads where power efficiency and integrated graphics matter more than raw CPU throughput, the 5200U is the better fit.

The verdict depends on the platform. If the use case is a desktop with discrete graphics and access to a 45 W cooling solution, the 2500T offers a consistent 17% performance advantage across all recorded tests. If the use case is a mobile device with tight power constraints and a need for newer integrated graphics, the 5200U's lower TDP and HD 5500 GPU make it the sensible option. The benchmark data cannot settle that trade-off, because it does not measure power draw or graphics performance. What the data does show is that in CPU-bound tasks, the older 2500T outperforms the newer 5200U by a wide and consistent margin.