Intel Core i5-4300M vs Intel Core i7-2635QM Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-4300M has 2 cores and 4 threads. The i7-2635QM doubles both core and thread counts.

Q: How do the two chips compare in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-4300M posts an average benchmark score of 1004, while the i7-2635QM scores 995. The i5-4300M leads by 0.9% in overall average, and both sit at the 27th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench multi-core tests?

A: The i7-2635QM wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It leads by 19% in Cinebench R15 (301 vs 253), 19% in R20 (1257 vs 1056), and 19.1% in R23 (2995 vs 2515).

Q: Which processor wins in Geekbench tests?

A: The i5-4300M wins both Geekbench tests decisively. It scores 1817 vs 1371 in multi-core (a 24.5% lead) and 882 vs 442 in single-core (a 49.9% lead).

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two?

A: The i7-2635QM uses Sandy Bridge on a 32nm process with 1,160 million transistors, while the i5-4300M uses Haswell on a 22nm process with 1,400 million transistors. The i5-4300M has a smaller die (118 mm² vs 216 mm²).

Q: How does single-core Cinebench performance compare?

A: The i7-2635QM leads in Cinebench single-core tests, with 177 vs 149 in R20 (18.8% ahead) and 422 vs 355 in R23 (18.9% ahead). This contrasts sharply with Geekbench single-core, where the i5-4300M leads by 49.9%.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along test-family lines. The Intel Core i7-2635QM wins all five Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multi-core variants. Its strongest margin comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 2995 against the i5-4300M's 2515, a 19.1% advantage. The i7-2635QM also wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 18.8% (177 vs 149) and R23 single-core by 18.9% (422 vs 355). In multi-core workloads, the i7-2635QM's 4-core/8-thread configuration provides consistent 19% leads across R15, R20, and R23.

The Intel Core i5-4300M dominates the Geekbench suite entirely. Its Geekbench single-core score of 882 crushes the i7-2635QM's 442, a 49.9% difference. In Geekbench multi-core, the i5-4300M scores 1817 versus 1371, a 24.5% lead. This is remarkable because the i5-4300M has half the cores and threads of its rival, yet still wins the multi-core Geekbench test. The i5-4300M's advantage in Geekbench likely reflects its higher base clock (2.60 GHz vs 2.00 GHz) and boost clock (3.60 GHz vs 2.90 GHz), which matter more in workloads that scale with frequency rather than core count.

The win tally reflects this split: the i7-2635QM takes 5 wins, the i5-4300M takes 2. However, the magnitude of the i5-4300M's Geekbench victories — particularly the near-50% single-core margin — suggests the newer Haswell architecture extracts far more performance per clock and per core. Users running Geekbench-style workloads (short, bursty, single-threaded tasks) would strongly prefer the i5-4300M, while users running sustained multi-threaded Cinebench-style renders would prefer the i7-2635QM.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing processes. The i7-2635QM is built on Sandy Bridge, fabricated at 32nm, with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i5-4300M uses Haswell, fabricated at 22nm, with 1,400 million transistors on a much smaller 118 mm² die. The die-size difference is striking: the i5-4300M packs 20% more transistors into 45% less area, reflecting a significant density improvement.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both chips share the same per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB), but the i7-2635QM has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-4300M has only 3 MB. The i7-2635QM's triple L3 capacity likely contributes to its Cinebench dominance, especially in multi-threaded workloads that benefit from shared data reuse.

The integrated graphics also differ: the i7-2635QM ships with Intel HD 3000, while the i5-4300M has Intel HD 5000. The socket types differ as well — the i7-2635QM uses Intel BGA 1224, while the i5-4300M uses Intel Socket G3. The i5-4300M also lists DDR3 memory support, while the i7-2635QM's memory support field is null in the data.

Clock speeds favor the i5-4300M significantly. Its base clock of 2.60 GHz is 30% higher than the i7-2635QM's 2.00 GHz, and its boost clock of 3.60 GHz is 24% higher than 2.90 GHz. Despite this, the i7-2635QM still wins all Cinebench tests, indicating that core count and cache matter more in those workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-2635QM | Intel Core i5-4300M |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.90 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45W | 37W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1224 | Intel Socket G3 |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Haswell |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | 1,160 million | 1,400 million |

| Die Size | 216 mm² | 118 mm² |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 3000 | Intel HD 5000 |

| Release Date | 2011-01-02 | 2013-08-31 |

The i7-2635QM offers double the cores, double the threads, and double the L3 cache. The i5-4300M counters with higher clocks, a newer architecture, a more advanced process node, and lower TDP (37W vs 45W). The release dates show a 2.5-year gap, with the i5-4300M arriving later. Both support ECC memory (false for both) and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a fascinating divergence between test suites. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-2635QM scores 301 against the i5-4300M's 253, a 19% lead. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1257 vs 1056, 19%) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (2995 vs 2515, 19.1%). The consistency across three generations of Cinebench suggests a stable performance advantage rooted in the i7-2635QM's extra cores and threads.

Single-core Cinebench results also favor the i7-2635QM, though by slightly smaller margins. In R20 single-core, the i7-2635QM scores 177 versus 149, an 18.8% lead. In R23 single-core, it scores 422 versus 355, an 18.9% lead. This is surprising given the i5-4300M's much higher clock speeds, but the data is unambiguous: the i7-2635QM wins every Cinebench test.

The Geekbench results invert the picture entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the i5-4300M scores 1817 versus 1371, a 24.5% lead. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 882 versus 442, a 49.9% lead. The single-core gap is nearly double the multi-core gap, highlighting the i5-4300M's superior per-core efficiency. The i5-4300M's 2.60 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost clock, combined with Haswell's architectural improvements, deliver Geekbench scores that the older Sandy Bridge chip cannot approach.

The average benchmark scores align closely: the i7-2635QM averages 995, the i5-4300M averages 1004. The i7-2635QM's nearest rivals include the i7-2920XM and Opteron 4226 (both at 995, 0% delta), while the i5-4300M's nearest rivals include the i5-2500S (1004, 0% delta) and i7-5600U (1005, -0.1% delta). Both chips occupy the same 27th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they belong to the same overall performance tier despite their divergent workload-specific results.

The Verdict

The data presents two processors optimized for different workloads. The Intel Core i7-2635QM is the clear choice for multi-threaded Cinebench-style rendering. It wins all five Cinebench tests with margins between 18.8% and 19.1%, and its 4-core/8-thread configuration with 6 MB of L3 cache provides a solid foundation for parallel workloads. Users who prioritize sustained multi-core performance — video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific computing — should choose the i7-2635QM.

The Intel Core i5-4300M is the choice for Geekbench-style workloads that favor high clock speeds and per-core efficiency. Its 49.9% single-core Geekbench lead is the largest margin in the entire comparison, and even its multi-core Geekbench win (24.5%) outpaces the i7-2635QM's Cinebench wins in percentage terms. The i5-4300M also draws less power (37W vs 45W), runs on a smaller die, and uses a newer architecture. Users who run single-threaded applications, bursty workloads, or care about power efficiency should favor the i5-4300M.

The win count favors the i7-2635QM (5 vs 2), but the average benchmark scores are nearly identical (995 vs 1004). Neither processor is objectively better — the right choice depends entirely on the workload. The i7-2635QM's Cinebench dominance suggests it excels in professional rendering tasks, while the i5-4300M's Geekbench dominance suggests it excels in everyday responsiveness and single-threaded productivity. Both sit at the 27th percentile overall, placing them in the same broad performance class, differentiated mainly by workload character rather than raw capability.