Intel Core i5-4250U vs Intel Core i5-750 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a remarkably one-sided picture. Across every recorded workload, the Intel Core i5-750 outperforms the Intel Core i5-4250U. The desktop part wins all five head-to-head tests, with margins that are consistent and meaningful. The i5-750 takes Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. The i5-4250U does not claim a single victory in the recorded measurements.

The use-case split is therefore not about which processor is faster, but about where each design fits in the broader market. The i5-4250U is a mobile-focused part. Its 15 watt thermal design power, small 118 mm² die size, and integrated Intel HD 5000 graphics point toward thin-and-light laptops where low power consumption and compact packaging matter more than raw compute throughput. The i5-750, by contrast, is a desktop processor with a 95 watt TDP, a 296 mm² die, and no integrated graphics. It targets mainstream desktop towers where sustained multi-core loads are common and power draw is less of a constraint.

In terms of workload suitability, the i5-750 is the clear choice for CPU-heavy tasks such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or any multi-threaded application that can use four physical cores. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 2172 versus 1811 for the i5-4250U shows a 16.6% advantage in heavily parallel work. Even in single-threaded tasks, where the i5-4250U's newer Haswell architecture might be expected to narrow the gap, the i5-750 still leads by 16.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (306 versus 255). The i5-4250U's lower clock speeds, with a base of 1300 MHz and a boost of 2.60 GHz, simply cannot overcome the i5-750's higher operating frequencies of 2.67 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost.

The i5-4250U does have advantages that are not captured in raw benchmark scores. It includes integrated graphics, which the i5-750 lacks entirely. It consumes far less power, at 15 watts versus 95 watts. It is built on a more advanced 22 nm process, allowing for a much smaller die with more transistors. These factors make it suitable for portable devices, but the recorded data shows no scenario where it wins a compute benchmark against the i5-750.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i5-750 is faster in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 218 versus 182 for the i5-4250U, a 16.5% advantage. In R20 multi-core, it scores 912 versus 760, a 16.7% edge. In R23 multi-core, it scores 2172 versus 1811, a 16.6% lead.

Q: Does the newer architecture of the i5-4250U help it win any single-core tests?

A: No. Despite being a Haswell part from 2013, the i5-4250U loses all single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-750 scores 128 versus 107, and in R23 single-core it scores 306 versus 255. Both are 16.4% and 16.7% wins for the i5-750 respectively.

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

A: The i5-4250U has 2 cores and 4 threads. The i5-750 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i5-750 benefits from having double the physical cores, while the i5-4250U relies on Hyper-Threading to reach 4 threads from 2 cores.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The i5-4250U includes Intel HD 5000 integrated graphics. The i5-750 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for any display output.

Q: How do their thermal design power figures compare?

A: The i5-4250U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the i5-750 has a TDP of 95 watts. The mobile part consumes roughly six times less power, which is a significant factor for laptops and compact systems.

Q: What are their respective market segments?

A: The i5-4250U is classified as a Mobile processor, designed for laptops and ultrabooks. The i5-750 is a Desktop processor, intended for desktop motherboards with Socket 1156.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are consistent to a striking degree. Across five Cinebench tests, the i5-750 wins every time with margins clustered tightly between 16.4% and 16.7%. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural, driven by fundamental differences in core count, clock speed, and power envelope, rather than by workload-specific quirks.

The largest single difference appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core. The i5-750 scores 912, while the i5-4250U scores 760. That is a 16.7% gap, the widest recorded delta. The R23 multi-core test shows a similar picture: 2172 versus 1811, a 16.6% difference. The R15 multi-core test shows 218 versus 182, a 16.5% margin. These multi-core results all favor the i5-750, which makes sense given its 4 physical cores versus 2 physical cores on the i5-4250U.

Single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-750 scores 128, versus 107 for the i5-4250U, a 16.4% lead. In R23 single-core, the i5-750 scores 306, versus 255, a 16.7% edge. The i5-750's boost clock of 3.20 GHz, compared to 2.60 GHz for the i5-4250U, explains this consistent single-thread advantage. Even though the i5-4250U is built on a newer 22 nm process with a more modern Haswell architecture, the higher clock speed of the older Lynnfield part wins outright.

The narrowest margin is 16.4% in R20 single-core, and the widest is 16.7% in both R20 multi-core and R23 single-core. The fact that all deltas fall within a 0.3 percentage point range indicates that the performance relationship between these two CPUs is stable across different rendering workloads and threading models. There is no test where the i5-4250U comes close to closing the gap.

For context, the average benchmark scores in the database place both processors at the 20th percentile among all CPUs. The i5-4250U has an average score of 756, while the i5-750 has an average score of 747. Interestingly, the i5-4250U's average is slightly higher, but that average includes Geekbench results which are not part of the head-to-head comparison. The i5-4250U shows Geekbench multi-core of 1434 and single-core of 742, while no Geekbench scores are recorded for the i5-750. This explains why the average scores are close despite the i5-750 winning all Cinebench tests.

The nearest rivals for the i5-4250U include the Intel Xeon E5450 with an average score of 756 (a 0.1% difference), the Intel Core i3-5020U at 757 (0.2% difference), the Intel Core i5-3230M at 754 (0.2% difference), and the Intel Core i5-3210M at 758 (0.2% difference). For the i5-750, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i5-4200U at 746 (0.2% difference), the AMD A10 PRO-7800B at 746 (0.2% difference), the AMD FX-9800P at 745 (0.2% difference), and the Intel Xeon E5520 at 742 (0.7% difference). These rivalries show that both CPUs sit in a crowded performance band, but the head-to-head data clearly favors the i5-750 in every direct comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The i5-4250U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i5-750 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i5-4250U runs at a 1300 MHz base clock with a 2.60 GHz boost, while the i5-750 runs at a 2.67 GHz base with a 3.20 GHz boost. The i5-4250U has a TDP of 15 watts, the i5-750 has a TDP of 95 watts.

Their sockets are incompatible. The i5-4250U uses Intel BGA 1168, a ball-grid array designed for soldered mobile installations. The i5-750 uses Intel Socket 1156, a land-grid array for desktop motherboards. The i5-4250U is a mobile part, the i5-750 is a desktop part.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. However, the L3 cache is much larger on the i5-750: 8 MB shared versus 3 MB shared on the i5-4250U.

The i5-4250U includes Intel HD 5000 integrated graphics. The i5-750 has no integrated graphics at all. Memory support is DDR3 for both, but the i5-750 specifies dual-channel memory, while the i5-4250U does not list a specific memory bus width. The i5-750 also has PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-4250U does not list PCIe information.

The i5-4250U was released on 2013-06-03, while the i5-750 was released on 2009-09-07. The i5-750 is marked as end-of-life, while the i5-4250U has no production status listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either.

Neither processor supports ECC memory. The i5-4250U has a part number of SR16M, while the i5-750 has SLBLC. The i5-4250U has no launch MSRP recorded, and the i5-750 also has no launch MSRP recorded.

Architecture Differences

The i5-4250U is built on the Haswell architecture, codenamed Haswell, using a 22 nm process node. It belongs to the Core i5 (Haswell) generation. The die contains 1,400 million transistors on an area of 118 mm². The i5-750 is built on the Nehalem architecture, codenamed Lynnfield, using a 45 nm process node. It belongs to the Core i5 (Lynnfield) generation. Its die contains 774 million transistors on a much larger 296 mm² area.

The process node difference is significant. The 22 nm node allows the i5-4250U to pack nearly twice as many transistors into less than half the die area. This density advantage enables the lower 15 watt TDP and the inclusion of integrated graphics. The i5-750's 45 nm node is older and less efficient, contributing to its 95 watt TDP.

Both processors share the same Intel x86 architecture lineage, but Haswell is a later microarchitecture than Nehalem. Haswell introduced improvements in instruction-level parallelism, power management, and integrated graphics capabilities. However, the recorded benchmarks show that these architectural improvements do not translate into higher scores for the i5-4250U, primarily because the i5-750 operates at much higher clock speeds and has twice the physical core count.

The cache hierarchy differs in L3 capacity: 3 MB shared on the i5-4250U versus 8 MB shared on the i5-750. This larger L3 cache on the i5-750 may help in workloads with larger working sets, though the head-to-head results show similar margins across all tests, suggesting the cache difference does not create a disproportionate impact.

The i5-4250U includes Intel HD 5000 integrated graphics, which is a Haswell-generation GPU. The i5-750 has no integrated graphics, reflecting its older Nehalem design era where desktop CPUs typically relied on discrete graphics cards.

Memory support is DDR3 for both, but the i5-750 lists dual-channel memory, while the i5-4250U does not specify a memory bus configuration. The i5-750 also lists PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes, while the i5-4250U does not provide PCIe details.

In summary, the architecture differences are substantial: 22 nm versus 45 nm, 1,400 million versus 774 million transistors, 118 mm² versus 296 mm² die size, 3 MB versus 8 MB L3 cache, with integrated graphics only on the i5-4250U. Yet the older, larger, more power-hungry i5-750 remains faster in every recorded benchmark. The data shows that for this comparison, core count and clock speed matter more than architectural age or process efficiency.