CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i7-920 and Intel Core i5-5200U represent two very different eras of Intel design, yet their average benchmark scores land within a hair of each other. The data shows a classic generational clash: a 45nm quad-core desktop part from 2008 facing a 14nm dual-core mobile chip from 2015. While the i5-5200U holds a slight edge in aggregate scoring, the head-to-head results tell a more decisive story, with the older i7-920 winning every single benchmark test included in the comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the data is the complete dominance of the Core i7-920 across all five Cinebench tests. The margin is consistent, hovering in the 14-15% range regardless of whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the i7-920 scores 246 against the i5-5200U's 214, a 15% advantage. That lead narrows only slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where 1025 versus 892 translates to a 14.9% win. The R23 multi-core test shows the same story: 2442 versus 2125, again a 14.9% gap.

What is more surprising is that the i7-920 also wins the single-core tests, despite its much older architecture and lower clock speeds relative to the mobile part's boost capability. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-920 posts 144 against 126, a 14.3% advantage. The R23 single-core test shows 344 versus 300, a 14.7% margin. This is notable because the i5-5200U has a higher boost clock (2.70 GHz) than the i7-920's boost (2.93 GHz), though the older chip still edges ahead, likely due to the sheer difference in thread count and the efficiency of the Nehalem design under these specific loads.

The head-to-head tally is unambiguous: the i7-920 wins all five tests, with no wins for the i5-5200U. However, the average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The i7-920 averages 840 points across its benchmark suite, while the i5-5200U averages 838. That 0.3% delta places the i5-5200U as a near-exact rival, and the i7-920's own rival list confirms this, listing the i5-5200U at a 0.3% delta. The i5-5200U's rival list similarly shows the i7-920 at a -0.3% delta, meaning the two chips are statistically tied in overall performance despite the i7-920's clean sweep in the direct tests.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split between these two processors is architectural. The i7-920 is built on Intel's Nehalem architecture, codenamed Bloomfield, and manufactured on a 45 nm process. It packs 731 million transistors into a 263 mm² die. The i5-5200U, by contrast, uses the Broadwell architecture, codenamed Broadwell-U, on a 14 nm process, a dramatic shrink that fits 1,300 million transistors into just 82 mm². That transistor density is a direct result of the seven-year gap between their release dates, with the i7-920 launching in November 2008 and the i5-5200U arriving in February 2015.

Core counts are equally divergent. The i7-920 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i5-5200U is a 2-core, 4-thread part. This explains the multi-core wins for the older chip, as it has twice the physical cores and double the thread count. Cache configurations follow the same pattern: the i7-920 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-5200U has only 3 MB. Per-core L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core, respectively, but the aggregate capacity favors the desktop part.

Clock speeds show a different trade-off. The i7-920 has a base clock of 2.67 GHz and boosts to 2.93 GHz. The i5-5200U runs at 2.20 GHz base and 2.70 GHz boost. Despite the lower nominal clocks, the i5-5200U's modern architecture and higher transistor count do not translate into a performance win in these tests. Power consumption is where the mobile chip shines: the i5-5200U has a 15 W TDP, while the i7-920 draws 130 W, an enormous difference that reflects their intended markets. The i7-920 uses an Intel Socket 1366, while the i5-5200U is soldered to Intel BGA 1168.

Memory support also differs. Both parts support DDR3, but the i7-920 uses a triple-channel memory bus, whereas the i5-5200U uses dual-channel. The i5-5200U has a listed memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the i7-920's bandwidth is not specified in the data. Neither supports ECC memory. PCIe support is Gen 2 for both, though the i5-5200U offers only 12 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-920's lane count is not detailed. The i5-5200U also includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 5500), while the i7-920 has none. Both chips are end-of-life and have locked multipliers.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for raw performance: the Intel Core i7-920 is the stronger processor in every benchmark measured. It wins all five Cinebench tests with margins between 14.3% and 15%. If the task is purely about compute throughput, multi-core rendering or single-threaded responsiveness, the i7-920 is the superior choice, despite being seven years older. Its 4-core/8-thread configuration and larger L3 cache give it a structural advantage that the i5-5200U's newer process cannot overcome in these specific tests.

However, the i5-5200U is not without its merits, and the average benchmark scores show the two chips are nearly identical overall: 840 versus 838, a 0.2% difference. The i5-5200U's rival list even places the i7-920 as its closest competitor at a -0.3% delta, meaning the overall performance envelope is effectively the same. Where the i5-5200U wins is in efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP versus 130 W is a 115 W gap, making it suitable for mobile devices where power draw is critical. It also includes integrated graphics and a smaller die size (82 mm² versus 263 mm²), which speaks to its design purpose.

The verdict depends on the use case. For a desktop user who needs maximum multi-threaded performance and has no power constraints, the i7-920 is the clear pick. For a mobile user or anyone prioritizing low power consumption and integrated graphics, the i5-5200U is the only sensible option, even if it loses every benchmark. The i5-5200U has a launch MSRP of $281, which is the only pricing data available.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-920 wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 246 versus 214 (a 15% lead); in R20, 1025 versus 892 (14.9%); and in R23, 2442 versus 2125 (14.9%).

Q: Does the newer i5-5200U win any single-core tests?

A: No. The i7-920 also wins single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 144 versus 126 (14.3%), and in R23 single-core, 344 versus 300 (14.7%).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-920 has an average benchmark score of 840, while the i5-5200U averages 838. That is a 0.2% difference, placing them as near-exact rivals in overall performance.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The i7-920 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The i5-5200U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The i7-920 has a TDP of 130 W, while the i5-5200U has a TDP of 15 W, a 115 W difference that reflects the desktop versus mobile design targets.

Q: Does the i5-5200U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel HD 5500. The i7-920 has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i7-920 wins in: Every single benchmark test in the head-to-head comparison. It is faster in multi-core rendering by roughly 15% across R15, R20, and R23 versions. It also wins single-core tests by a similar margin, which is notable given its older architecture. The i7-920's 8 MB of shared L3 cache and 4-core/8-thread design provide a structural performance advantage that the i5-5200U cannot match in Cinebench workloads. Its 130 W TDP indicates it is built for sustained desktop performance without thermal constraints.

Intel Core i5-5200U wins in: Efficiency and portability. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. It integrates Intel HD 5500 graphics, eliminating the need for a separate GPU. Its 14 nm process and 82 mm² die size (versus 263 mm² for the i7-920) demonstrate a far more compact design. The i5-5200U also has a higher transistor count (1,300 million versus 731 million), which reflects the density advantage of newer manufacturing. In practical terms, this chip is the only viable option for mobile use cases, even though it loses every benchmark to the i7-920. Its dual-channel memory bus and listed 25.6 GB/s bandwidth also point to a more integrated platform, though the i7-920's triple-channel support is not directly compared here.