Intel Core i5-3360M vs Intel Core i7-4500U Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-4500U has a higher average benchmark score of 859, compared to 835 for the Intel Core i5-3360M. This places the i7-4500U in the 23rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-3360M sits in the 22nd percentile.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The i5-3360M wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15, it scores 246 versus 212 for the i7-4500U, a 16% advantage. In Cinebench R20, the margin is also 16% (1029 vs 887), and in Cinebench R23, it leads 2451 to 2113, again by 16%.

Q: Does the i7-4500U win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, the i7-4500U wins both Geekbench tests by wide margins. In Geekbench multi-core, it scores 1562 versus 1110 for the i5-3360M, a 28.9% advantage. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 818 versus 518, a 36.7% lead.

Q: What are the TDP differences between these two mobile processors?

A: The i5-3360M has a TDP of 35 watts, while the i7-4500U has a TDP of 15 watts. This means the i7-4500U is rated for substantially lower power draw, typical of an ultra-low-power design.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The i7-4500U has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-3360M has 3 MB of shared L3 cache. Both use the same 22 nm process node and have identical per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) caches.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds for each chip?

A: The i5-3360M runs at a base clock of 2.80 GHz and boosts to 3.50 GHz. The i7-4500U has a base clock of 1800.00 MHz (1.80 GHz) and boosts to 3.00 GHz. The i5-3360M has significantly higher clock speeds in both states.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data reveals a clear split between two different workload profiles. The i5-3360M dominates in all Cinebench tests, which are heavily threaded rendering workloads that stress sustained multi-core performance. It wins five of the seven head-to-head benchmarks, with a consistent 16% margin across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, plus similar margins in the single-core variants of R20 and R23. This makes it the stronger choice for content creation tasks that resemble Cinebench's rendering engine.

The i7-4500U, despite losing the Cinebench suite, wins decisively in Geekbench. The single-core Geekbench result shows a 36.7% advantage (818 vs 518), and the multi-core result shows a 28.9% advantage (1562 vs 1110). Geekbench measures a broader mix of integer, floating-point, and memory operations, often reflecting real-world application responsiveness more than pure sustained rendering. The data suggests the i7-4500U excels in workloads that are bursty and latency-sensitive, where its architectural efficiency compensates for lower clock speeds.

In terms of overall percentile ranking, the i7-4500U sits just one percentile higher (23rd versus 22nd), and its average score of 859 is only 2.9% above the i5-3360M's 835. The two chips are close in aggregate performance, but their strengths are sharply differentiated. Users who prioritize rendering throughput should favor the i5-3360M, while those who favor general-purpose responsiveness should look at the i7-4500U.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures and target different power envelopes. The i5-3360M is built on Ivy Bridge, while the i7-4500U uses Haswell-ULT. Both are fabricated on Intel's 22 nm process node and share the same die size of 118 mm², but the i7-4500U integrates 1,300 million transistors, whereas the transistor count for the i5-3360M is not recorded.

The cache hierarchy differs in the L3 portion. The i5-3360M has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-4500U has 4 MB. Both have identical per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) configurations. The larger L3 cache in the i7-4500U likely contributes to its Geekbench advantage, as more data can reside closer to the cores.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i5-3360M pairs with Intel HD 4000, while the i7-4500U uses Intel HD 4400. Both are mobile processors, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-3360M uses the Intel BGA 1023 socket, while the i7-4500U uses Intel BGA 1168, meaning they are not socket-compatible.

Clock speeds are a major architectural differentiator. The i5-3360M has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost of 3.50 GHz, while the i7-4500U has a base of 1.80 GHz and a boost of 3.00 GHz. The i5-3360M's higher clocks explain its Cinebench dominance, while the i7-4500U's newer Haswell core design and larger cache explain its Geekbench efficiency.

The TDP values reflect the design intent: 35 watts for the i5-3360M versus 15 watts for the i7-4500U. The Haswell-ULT line was engineered for thin-and-light laptops, prioritizing power efficiency over maximum sustained performance. The Ivy Bridge chip, by contrast, was aimed at more traditional mobile workstations that could dissipate more heat.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-3360M | Intel Core i7-4500U |

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

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Haswell-ULT |

| Codename | Ivy Bridge | Haswell-ULT |

| Generation | Core i5 (Ivy Bridge) | Core i7 (Haswell) |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 1800.00 MHz (1.80 GHz) |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1023 | Intel BGA 1168 |

| L3 Cache | 3 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 1,300 million |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4000 | Intel HD 4400 |

| Memory Support | Not recorded | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2012-05-31 | 2013-06-03 |

| Part Number | SR0MW | SR16Z |

Both processors share the same core count (2), thread count (4), process node (22 nm), die size (118 mm²), and per-core L1/L2 cache sizes. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i5-3360M wins every Cinebench test by a nearly identical margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 246 against 212 for the i7-4500U, a 16% advantage. The same 16% margin appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1029 vs 887) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (2451 vs 2113). Single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern: R20 shows 145 vs 125 (16% lead), and R23 shows 346 vs 298 (16.1% lead). These consistent margins suggest the i5-3360M's higher clock speeds provide a uniform performance advantage in Cinebench's rendering workload.

The i7-4500U's wins are much larger in percentage terms. Geekbench multi-core shows a 28.9% advantage (1562 vs 1110), and Geekbench single-core shows a 36.7% advantage (818 vs 518). The single-core Geekbench gap is the largest of any benchmark in the comparison, and it is particularly striking given that the i5-3360M has a higher boost clock (3.50 GHz vs 3.00 GHz). The i7-4500U's Haswell architecture and 4 MB L3 cache appear to deliver superior instructions-per-clock efficiency in Geekbench's workload mix.

The overall win count favors the i5-3360M at 5 wins versus 2 for the i7-4500U. However, the magnitude of the i7-4500U's Geekbench wins is substantial, and its average benchmark score of 859 is higher than the i5-3360M's 835. The head-to-head data indicates that the i5-3360M is the stronger rendering chip, while the i7-4500U offers superior general-purpose performance as measured by Geekbench.

Looking at nearest rivals, the i5-3360M's average score of 835 places it just 0.2% below the Intel Xeon X3450 (837) and 0.3% below the Intel Core i5-5200U (838). The i7-4500U's average of 859 is 0.1% below the AMD A8-7650K (860) and 0.3% above the Intel Core i5-2500T (856). These close margins suggest both chips are competitive within their respective performance tiers, though the i7-4500U sits slightly higher in the aggregate ranking.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct usage scenarios. For sustained multi-core rendering workloads, the Intel Core i5-3360M is the clear choice. It wins all four Cinebench multi-core and single-core tests with a 16% margin, and its higher base and boost clocks (2.80 GHz base, 3.50 GHz boost) provide consistent performance under load. The 35-watt TDP indicates a design that can maintain higher clock speeds without the thermal constraints of a 15-watt part.

For general-purpose computing, particularly applications that mirror Geekbench's diverse workload mix, the Intel Core i7-4500U is superior. Its Geekbench single-core score of 818 is 36.7% higher, and its multi-core score of 1562 is 28.9% higher. The newer Haswell architecture, larger 4 MB L3 cache, and lower 15-watt TDP make it a more efficient choice for everyday tasks where bursty performance matters more than sustained rendering throughput.

The average benchmark scores reflect this nuanced picture. The i7-4500U's 859 average is only 2.9% above the i5-3360M's 835, and their percentile rankings are adjacent (23rd vs 22nd). Neither chip is a dominant overall winner; they are optimized for different priorities.

Users who run rendering software, video encoding, or other sustained multi-core workloads should select the i5-3360M. Users who prioritize responsiveness in general applications, battery life (given the 15-watt TDP), and a more modern architecture should select the i7-4500U. The i7-4500U also offers a larger L3 cache and a newer integrated graphics solution (Intel HD 4400 vs Intel HD 4000), which may matter for light multimedia use. The i5-3360M's dual-channel memory bus could be an advantage in memory-sensitive tasks, though the recorded data does not quantify this. Ultimately, the choice hinges on workload type: rendering favors the i5-3360M, while general efficiency favors the i7-4500U.