Intel Core i5-3360M vs Intel Core i5-5200U Comparison

The Intel Core i5-5200U and Intel Core i5-3360M are both dual-core, four-thread mobile processors from Intel, but they represent very different design philosophies and eras. The 5200U is a 14 nm Broadwell part built for efficiency, while the 3360M is a 22 nm Ivy Bridge chip tuned for higher sustained performance. The benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: the older 3360M dominates in Cinebench workloads, while the newer 5200U crushes it in Geekbench. This page breaks down exactly where each processor wins, what the architectural differences mean, and which type of user should favor which chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head results is the complete reversal of fortunes between the two benchmark suites. In Cinebench, the Intel Core i5-3360M wins every single test by a consistent margin. The gap ranges from 13% to 13.3%, which is remarkably uniform across both multi-core and single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 3360M scores 246 against the 5200U’s 214, a 13% advantage. That lead grows slightly to 13.3% in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the 3360M posts 1029 versus 892. The single-core results tell the same story: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the 3360M hits 145 while the 5200U manages 126, a 13.1% edge. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern, with the 3360M winning multi-core 2451 to 2125 and single-core 346 to 300, both at 13.3% deltas. This consistency suggests the 3360M’s higher clock speeds give it a fundamental advantage in these rendering workloads.

The Geekbench results flip the script entirely. Here, the Intel Core i5-5200U wins by massive margins. In Geekbench multi-core, the 5200U scores 1464 against the 3360M’s 1110, a 31.9% advantage. The single-core test is even more lopsided: 742 versus 518, a 43.2% lead for the 5200U. This is a huge discrepancy. The 5200U not only wins, it wins by nearly half again as much performance in single-threaded Geekbench work. The data suggests that the 5200U’s newer Broadwell architecture, despite its lower clock speed, has significantly better instructions-per-clock (IPC) efficiency that shines in Geekbench’s workload mix.

Overall, the 3360M takes 5 benchmark wins out of 7, while the 5200U secures 2. However, the average benchmark scores are nearly identical: the 5200U sits at 838 and the 3360M at 835. This places both processors at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are performance peers in aggregate. The nearest rivals list confirms this: the 5200U is essentially tied with the Intel Core i5-3380M (838, 0% delta) and the Intel Xeon X3450 (837, 0.1% delta). The 3360M is similarly clustered, sitting just 0.3% behind the 5200U and 0.4% behind the i5-3380M. The takeaway is that these are not chips from different performance tiers; they are competitors with different strengths in different test suites.

The Verdict

Choosing between these two comes down to which benchmark suite matches your actual workload. If your applications rely on sustained multi-core rendering or encoding, the Intel Core i5-3360M is the clear winner. Its 13% to 13.3% lead across all four Cinebench tests means it will finish rendering tasks noticeably faster. The 3360M’s higher base clock of 2.80 GHz and boost clock of 3.50 GHz, compared to the 5200U’s 2.20 GHz and 2.70 GHz, directly translate to this Cinebench dominance.

However, if your work involves the kinds of tasks Geekbench measures — which often include more varied, bursty, single-threaded operations — the Intel Core i5-5200U is the superior choice. Its 43.2% lead in single-core Geekbench is enormous, suggesting that day-to-day responsiveness in lighter applications could feel significantly snappier on the 5200U. The 31.9% multi-core Geekbench win reinforces that the 5200U’s architectural efficiency can overcome the 3360M’s clock speed advantage in many real-world scenarios.

The production status also matters. The 5200U is listed as end-of-life, while the 3360M has no production status listed, implying it may still be available in some channels. For a new build, the 5200U’s 14 nm process node and smaller 82 mm² die size make it a more modern choice, even if it is officially discontinued. The 3360M’s 22 nm node and 118 mm² die are older technology. Ultimately, the data says: pick the 3360M for sustained compute, pick the 5200U for efficiency and Geekbench-style tasks. Neither chip is a bad choice, but they excel in different arenas.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-5200U has an average benchmark score of 838, while the Intel Core i5-3360M scores 835. This difference is negligible, placing both at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: How much faster is the 3360M in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The 3360M scores 2451 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 13.3% higher than the 5200U’s 2125.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two chips?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench single-core, where the 5200U wins with a 43.2% delta, scoring 742 versus the 3360M’s 518.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-5200U and the Intel Core i5-3360M have 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-3360M has a higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz, compared to the 5200U’s 2.70 GHz.

Q: How do these CPUs compare to the Intel Core i5-3380M?

A: The 5200U is exactly tied with the i5-3380M at an average score of 838 (0% delta), while the 3360M is 0.4% behind the i5-3380M with a score of 835.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification areas. The most obvious is clock speed: the Intel Core i5-3360M runs at a 2.80 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.50 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-5200U is slower at 2.20 GHz base and 2.70 GHz boost. This directly explains the 3360M’s Cinebench wins.

Thermal design power (TDP) is another major difference. The 5200U is rated at 15 watts, while the 3360M consumes 35 watts. This means the 5200U is designed for thinner, cooler-running laptops, while the 3360M requires more substantial cooling and battery capacity. The sockets differ accordingly: the 5200U uses Intel BGA 1168, and the 3360M uses Intel BGA 1023.

Memory support differs as well. The 5200U supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The 3360M also supports dual-channel memory, but its memory type and bandwidth are not specified in the data. The integrated graphics are different too: the 5200U features Intel HD 5500, while the 3360M comes with Intel HD 4000.

The release dates are far apart. The 3360M launched on 2012-05-31, while the 5200U arrived on 2015-02-28. The 5200U has a launch MSRP of $281, while the 3360M has no listed launch MSRP. The 5200U’s part number is SR23Y, and the 3360M’s is SR0MW. Both processors have locked multipliers and do not support ECC memory.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is significant, even though they share the same core and thread counts. The Intel Core i5-5200U is built on the Broadwell architecture, specifically the Broadwell-U codename, using a 14 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry. It packs 1,300 million transistors into an 82 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-3360M, by contrast, uses the older Ivy Bridge architecture with a 22 nm process node and a larger 118 mm² die. The transistor count for the 3360M is not listed, but the larger die on an older node indicates a less efficient design.

Both chips share identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither has any 3D V-Cache. The memory bus is dual-channel for both, but the 5200U has a specified bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s while the 3360M’s bandwidth is unlisted.

The PCIe support differs as well. The 5200U supports PCIe Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while the 3360M has no PCIe specification listed. The integrated graphics are another architectural differentiator: the 5200U’s Intel HD 5500 is a newer generation than the 3360M’s Intel HD 4000, which likely contributes to the 5200U’s Geekbench advantage. Both are mobile market segments, but the 5200U is marked end-of-life while the 3360M’s production status is not specified.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-3360M wins in sustained compute workloads, as evidenced by its sweep of all five Cinebench tests. If your primary tasks involve rendering, video encoding, or any multi-threaded batch processing that runs for extended periods, the 3360M’s higher clock speeds will deliver consistently faster results. Its 13% to 13.3% advantage across every Cinebench version is a strong indicator of real-world rendering performance. The 35-watt TDP also suggests it can maintain those clocks under load without throttling as aggressively as a 15-watt part.

The Intel Core i5-5200U wins in Geekbench-style workloads, which tend to emphasize single-threaded efficiency and mixed integer/floating-point operations. The 43.2% single-core and 31.9% multi-core Geekbench leads are enormous, indicating that the Broadwell architecture’s IPC improvements more than compensate for the lower clock speed. For users who run lighter applications, browse the web, or use software that benefits from quick burst performance, the 5200U will feel faster. Its 15-watt TDP also makes it the better choice for fanless or ultra-thin designs where thermal management is critical.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, so neither chip is a clear overall winner. The data simply shows a division of labor: the 3360M is a compute workhorse, and the 5200U is an efficiency champion with superior single-threaded responsiveness. Your choice should be dictated by whether your software leans toward Cinebench-style rendering or Geekbench-style general computing. The 22nd percentile ranking for both chips confirms they are budget-tier performers in the modern CPU landscape, but within that tier, they serve different masters.