Intel Core i5-5200U vs Intel Core i5-L16G7 Comparison

Intel Core i5-5200U and Intel Core i5-L16G7 are both end-of-life mobile processors from Intel, but they represent very different design philosophies. The i5-5200U is a dual-core Broadwell chip from early 2015, while the i5-L16G7 is a five-core Lakefield hybrid design built for low power. Benchmark data shows the newer Lakefield part wins every recorded multi-core and single-core test, though the margins are consistent and the overall performance class remains similar. Both chips sit at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they are entry-level performers by modern standards. The average benchmark score for the i5-5200U is 838, while the i5-L16G7 averages 816, a small gap that reflects the trade-offs between the two designs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins all five recorded comparisons. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the L16G7 scores 281 against 214 for the 5200U, a delta of 23.8 percent. That pattern repeats across every other test. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1173 versus 892, a 24 percent advantage. Cinebench R20 single-core is 165 against 126, a 23.6 percent lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core follows with 2793 versus 2125, another 23.9 percent gap, and R23 single-core is 394 versus 300, also 23.9 percent.

The consistency of these margins is notable. The L16G7 leads by roughly 24 percent in every workload, whether the test is single-threaded or multi-threaded. That suggests the difference is not about core count scaling but rather about per-core efficiency and clock behavior. The 5200U has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 2.70 GHz. The L16G7 lists a base clock of 1400.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The L16G7’s boost is noticeably higher, which helps explain the single-core advantage. For multi-core, the L16G7 has five cores versus two, so even with lower sustained clocks it can pull ahead.

The Geekbench results only exist for the 5200U, with a multi-core score of 1464 and single-core of 742. No Geekbench data is recorded for the L16G7, so cross-referencing that workload is not possible. The Cinebench suite alone tells the story: the L16G7 is the faster chip in every measured scenario. The delta percentages are all negative from the perspective of the 5200U, meaning it trails by roughly a quarter in each test. This is a clean sweep with no workload where the older Broadwell part manages to win.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The i5-5200U is built on Broadwell, using the 14 nm process node, and is part of the Broadwell-U generation. It has 2 cores and 4 threads, with a 15 W TDP. The i5-L16G7 uses the Lakefield architecture on a 10 nm node, featuring 5 cores and 5 threads with a 7 W TDP. Both are manufactured by Intel and share an 82 mm² die size, but the transistor counts differ dramatically. The 5200U packs 1,300 million transistors, while the L16G7 has 4,050 million. That threefold increase in transistors on the same die area reflects the much more complex hybrid design of Lakefield.

Cache configurations also diverge. The 5200U has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. The L16G7 lists 80 KB of L1 total, 512 KB of L2, and 4 MB of shared L3. The L16G7’s cache is larger overall, but it is not per-core in the same way. The L1 and L2 figures are totals, not per-core allocations. This matters because the L16G7 has five cores sharing that cache, whereas the 5200U has two cores with dedicated L1 and L2.

Memory support is another major split. The 5200U uses DDR3 with a dual-channel memory bus and 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The L16G7 uses LPDDR4X with a single-channel bus and 17.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The L16G7 has a newer memory type but a narrower bus, resulting in lower peak bandwidth. That could hurt in memory-sensitive workloads, though the benchmark results do not show a downside in Cinebench. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 5200U has Gen 2 with 12 lanes, while the L16G7 has Gen 3 with 6 lanes. The newer standard is faster per lane, but the L16G7 offers fewer lanes total.

Integrated graphics are different as well. The 5200U carries Intel HD 5500, while the L16G7 has UHD Graphics 64EU. No graphics benchmarks are in the database, so performance cannot be quantified, but the naming suggests a generational leap. The L16G7 also uses a different socket: the 5200U is on Intel BGA 1168, while the L16G7 has no socket listed, indicating a soldered or integrated design. Both chips support non-ECC memory and have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

Given the benchmark data, the L16G7 wins every recorded performance test. That makes the use-case split straightforward for raw compute. The L16G7 is better for Cinebench-style rendering loads, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. Its 24 percent lead in both Cinebench R23 multi-core and single-core means it is the stronger choice for any workload that relies on CPU throughput, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or general productivity tasks that scale with clock speed.

The 5200U does have one potential advantage: memory bandwidth. With dual-channel DDR3 and 25.6 GB/s, it offers roughly 50 percent more bandwidth than the L16G7’s single-channel LPDDR4X at 17.1 GB/s. The database does not include memory-specific benchmarks, so this cannot be confirmed in practice. But for workloads that are memory-latency or bandwidth sensitive, the 5200U’s configuration might hold up better than the Cinebench scores suggest. The L16G7 also has fewer PCIe lanes, which could limit expansion options in a system that relies on multiple NVMe drives or discrete GPUs.

Power consumption is another differentiator. The L16G7 has a 7 W TDP versus the 5200U’s 15 W. That is a major efficiency gap, nearly half the power envelope. For fanless designs or ultra-portable devices, the L16G7 is clearly the better fit. The 5200U is also end-of-life and was released in 2015, while the L16G7 has no release date listed but is also end-of-life. Both are obsolete by current standards, but the L16G7 is the newer design and the only one that wins any recorded benchmark.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear verdict: the Intel Core i5-L16G7 is the faster processor in every measured workload. It leads by roughly 24 percent in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. Its higher boost clock of 3.00 GHz and five-core design give it a decisive edge over the 5200U’s two-core layout and 2.70 GHz boost. The L16G7 also does this at half the TDP, 7 W versus 15 W, which is an extraordinary efficiency result. For any buyer choosing between these two in a mobile device, the L16G7 is the better choice for CPU performance and power consumption.

The 5200U is not without merits. Its dual-channel memory bus and higher memory bandwidth could be relevant in specific tasks, though no benchmark confirms this. It also has more PCIe lanes, 12 versus 6, which might matter in a system with multiple peripherals. But in the recorded data, the 5200U wins zero tests. The L16G7 wins all five. The average benchmark score of 838 for the 5200U versus 816 for the L16G7 is the only metric where the 5200U leads, but that is a composite score and does not reflect any individual workload advantage. The percentile ranking is identical at 22, so both are near the bottom of the database's CPU performance distribution.

For a practical recommendation: if the device is for light productivity, web browsing, or media playback, either chip will feel similar because both are low-end by today's standards. If the workload involves rendering, encoding, or any sustained CPU load, the L16G7 is clearly superior. If battery life and thermals are the priority, the L16G7’s 7 W TDP is a compelling reason to choose it. The 5200U only makes sense in a system that specifically needs dual-channel memory or a traditional BGA 1168 socket, which are niche concerns.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the Intel Core i5-5200U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How much faster is the L16G7 in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The L16G7 scores 2793 versus 2125 for the 5200U, a 23.9 percent advantage.

Q: Do both processors have the same TDP?

A: No. The 5200U has a 15 W TDP, while the L16G7 has a 7 W TDP.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each chip?

A: The 5200U has 25.6 GB/s with dual-channel DDR3, and the L16G7 has 17.1 GB/s with single-channel LPDDR4X.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The L16G7 boosts to 3.00 GHz, while the 5200U boosts to 2.70 GHz.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every key specification. The 5200U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads. Base clocks are 2.20 GHz for the 5200U and 1400.00 MHz for the L16G7, though the boost clocks are 2.70 GHz and 3.00 GHz respectively. TDP is 15 W for the 5200U and 7 W for the L16G7. The 5200U uses the Intel BGA 1168 socket, while the L16G7 has no socket listed. Architecture is Broadwell for the 5200U and Lakefield for the L16G7. Process nodes are 14 nm and 10 nm respectively. Transistor counts are 1,300 million versus 4,050 million, with both at 82 mm² die size.

Cache differences are also present. The 5200U has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, while the L16G7 has 80 KB L1 total and 512 KB L2 total. L3 cache is 3 MB shared on the 5200U and 4 MB shared on the L16G7. Memory support is DDR3 dual-channel for the 5200U and LPDDR4X single-channel for the L16G7. PCIe is Gen 2 with 12 lanes on the 5200U and Gen 3 with 6 lanes on the L16G7. Integrated graphics are Intel HD 5500 for the 5200U and UHD Graphics 64EU for the L16G7. The 5200U has a release date of 2015-02-28, while the L16G7 has no release date listed. Both have a launch MSRP of $281 and are end-of-life. The part numbers are SR23Y for the 5200U and SRH4U,SRJGA for the L16G7.