Intel Core i5-4570R vs Intel Core i5-760 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i5-760 scores 4624 versus the Core i5-4570R’s 3879, a 19.2% advantage in the multi-core test.

Q: Does the newer Haswell chip win any benchmark in this comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows six wins for the Core i5-760 and zero for the Core i5-4570R across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

Q: How much higher is the single-core score of the older Lynnfield part?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-760 scores 652 versus 547 for the i5-4570R — a 19.2% lead. The gap is similar in R15 (65 vs 54, or 20.4%) and R20 (273 vs 229, or 19.2%).

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each CPU?

A: The i5-760 has an average benchmark score of 1337, while the i5-4570R averages 1318. Both sit at the 35th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has the higher base and boost clock?

A: The i5-760 runs at a 2.80 GHz base and 3.33 GHz boost, while the i5-4570R runs at 2.70 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the i5-760 and i5-4570R lack ECC memory support.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different Intel design eras. The Core i5-760 is built on the Nehalem architecture with the Lynnfield codename, manufactured on Intel’s 45 nm process. It integrates 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die. The Core i5-4570R belongs to the Haswell family under the Crystal Well codename, using a 22 nm process with 1,700 million transistors packed into a 260 mm² die. That’s more than double the transistor count on a smaller piece of silicon.

Cache layouts differ sharply. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the i5-760 carries 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-4570R has just 4 MB of shared L3. Despite the newer architecture, the Haswell part has half the last-level cache of its predecessor.

Memory support is DDR3 dual-channel on both, but the i5-4570R lists a specific memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the i5-760 does not report a bandwidth figure. PCIe connectivity also advances: the i5-760 uses Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the i5-4570R moves to Gen 3 with the same 16 lanes.

The integrated graphics situation changes significantly. The i5-760 has no integrated graphics listed, while the i5-4570R includes Intel Iris Pro 5200. That is a major feature divergence for builds that rely on the CPU’s built-in display output.

Socket compatibility is entirely different. The i5-760 uses Intel Socket 1156, while the i5-4570R is a BGA 1364 package, meaning it is soldered rather than socketed. The i5-4570R also draws far less power, with a TDP of 65 watts versus 95 watts for the i5-760.

Production status and release timing put these chips in different generations. The i5-760 launched in July 2010; the i5-4570R arrived in June 2013. Both are end-of-life products, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Across every Cinebench test in the dataset, the Core i5-760 beats the Core i5-4570R by a remarkably consistent margin. The multi-core R15 result has the i5-760 at 466 points against 390 for the i5-4570R, a 19.5% advantage. Single-core R15 shows 65 versus 54, a 20.4% lead — the largest delta in the entire comparison.

Moving to R20, the i5-760 scores 1942 multi-core and 273 single-core, while the i5-4570R manages 1629 and 229 respectively. Both deltas sit at 19.2%. The R23 results follow the same pattern: 4624 versus 3879 in multi-core and 652 versus 547 in single-core, again a 19.2% gap each way.

The consistency is striking. From R15 to R23, the relative performance gap barely moves — it stays within a narrow band of 19.2% to 20.4% across all six tests. This suggests the i5-760’s advantage is not workload-dependent within this Cinebench suite; it holds up equally in single-threaded and fully threaded rendering tasks.

The i5-4570R does have a Geekbench result in its benchmark list — 2872 multi-core and 943 single-core — but there is no corresponding Geekbench score for the i5-760 in the dataset, so no head-to-head comparison can be drawn from those numbers.

The i5-760’s nearest rivals in the aggregate benchmark database include the Core i5-4590T with an average score of 1340 (0.2% below the i5-760), the Core i5-4460S at 1330 (0.5% above), and the Core i5-2500K at 1329 (0.6% above). The i5-4670 sits at 1347, which is 0.8% below the i5-760. For the i5-4570R, its closest comparables are the Celeron G6900E and G6900T, both at 1321 (0.2% below), the Core i7-3770T at 1314 (0.3% above), and the AMD Athlon Gold 7220U at 1311 (0.5% above).

These rival positions show both CPUs occupy nearly the same aggregate performance tier, within a percentage point of each other and their peers. The i5-760’s average score of 1337 versus 1318 for the i5-4570R is a difference of about 1.4%, far smaller than the 19%+ margins seen in the dedicated Cinebench head-to-head.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is process node: 45 nm for the i5-760, 22 nm for the i5-4570R. Transistor count jumps from 774 million to 1,700 million, while die size shrinks from 296 mm² to 260 mm².

Clock speeds favor the older chip. The i5-760 runs at 2.80 GHz base and 3.33 GHz boost; the i5-4570R runs at 2.70 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. Power draw reverses the expectation — the i5-760 consumes 95 watts TDP, while the i5-4570R consumes only 65 watts.

Socket and packaging are incompatible. The i5-760 uses Socket 1156, a traditional LGA socket; the i5-4570R uses BGA 1364, a ball-grid array that is soldered to the board. Part numbers differ as SLBRP for the i5-760 and SR18P for the i5-4570R.

Cache is a significant differentiator. The i5-760 provides 8 MB of shared L3, exactly double the 4 MB found on the i5-4570R. L1 and L2 are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core.

PCIe generation advances from Gen 2 to Gen 3, though lane count stays at 16 (CPU only). Memory bandwidth is listed only for the i5-4570R at 25.6 GB/s; the i5-760 has no reported figure. Both support dual-channel DDR3 and neither supports ECC.

Integrated graphics separate these parts completely. The i5-760 has none listed; the i5-4570R includes Intel Iris Pro 5200. Release dates are June 2013 for the i5-4570R and July 2010 for the i5-760. Neither processor has a launch MSRP in the data, and neither is multiplier-unlocked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-760 wins every benchmark in this comparison, and that is the entire story of the head-to-head data. It is ahead by roughly a fifth in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench workloads, across three generations of the Cinebench suite. If the task is CPU-heavy rendering, video encoding, or any threaded workload measured by Cinebench, the i5-760 is the stronger performer.

The i5-760’s wins are not marginal. A 19.2% to 20.4% lead in every single test is a clear, repeatable margin. This advantage likely comes from its higher base and boost clocks (2.80/3.33 GHz versus 2.70/3.20 GHz) and its doubled L3 cache (8 MB versus 4 MB). The older 45 nm process and higher 95-watt TDP did not hold it back in these specific workloads.

The Intel Core i5-4570R does not win a single benchmark in the provided head-to-head set. However, it wins in other dimensions that matter for certain use cases. Its 65-watt TDP makes it far more power-efficient — a 30-watt reduction from the i5-760. The 22 nm process and 1,700 million transistors deliver modern architecture features without the thermal burden.

The i5-4570R also includes Intel Iris Pro 5200 integrated graphics, which the i5-760 lacks entirely. For a compact desktop or a system without a discrete GPU, the i5-4570R offers display output and graphics acceleration out of the box. The i5-760 would require a separate graphics card.

PCIe Gen 3 support gives the i5-4570R a modern connectivity advantage over the i5-760’s Gen 2. The i5-4570R’s memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s is also specified, a figure absent for the i5-760.

In practical terms, the i5-760 is the choice for raw compute performance in Cinebench-style workloads. The i5-4570R is the choice for low-power, integrated-graphics systems where the CPU’s rendering lead matters less than efficiency, smaller footprint, and the ability to drive a display without an add-in card. Both processors sit at the 35th percentile of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are within 1.4% of each other — but the dedicated head-to-head tests tell a different, more decisive story.