Intel Core i5-5250U vs Intel Core i7-3520M Comparison

The Intel Core i5-5250U and Intel Core i7-3520M represent two distinct mobile philosophies, yet their benchmark results reveal a surprising split. The i7-3520M dominates Cinebench tests across the board, while the i5-5250U counterattacks with decisive victories in Geekbench. This data suggests that the choice between them depends heavily on which benchmark suite reflects the user's actual workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the complete divergence between Cinebench and Geekbench results. In all five Cinebench tests, the Intel Core i7-3520M wins with a remarkably consistent deltaPct of approximately -14% relative to the i5-5250U. The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the i7-3520M scoring 244 against the i5-5250U's 209, a 14.3% advantage. This pattern holds across Cinebench R20 multicore (1018 vs 873, -14.2%), R20 singlecore (143 vs 123, -14%), R23 multicore (2426 vs 2079, -14.3%), and R23 singlecore (342 vs 293, -14.3%). The consistency of these margins suggests a fundamental throughput advantage for the i7-3520M in rendering workloads.

However, the Geekbench results flip the narrative completely. The i5-5250U wins Geekbench multicore with a score of 1587 versus 1156 for the i7-3520M, a massive 37.3% delta. The singlecore gap is even wider: the i5-5250U scores 825 against 570, a 44.7% advantage for the newer chip. These are not marginal differences; they represent a complete reversal of the Cinebench hierarchy. The i7-3520M wins five of the seven head-to-head tests, but the two Geekbench victories for the i5-5250U are so large that they nearly balance the overall picture.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the gap narrows considerably. The i5-5250U averages 856 across all tests, while the i7-3520M averages 843. This puts the i5-5250U just 1.5% ahead overall, a margin that falls well within the noise of individual benchmark variance. Both processors sit at the 23rd percentile among all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same tier of overall performance despite their divergent strengths. The i5-5250U's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-2500T with an identical average score of 856, while the i7-3520M sits alongside the AMD FX-8800P at 843.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is substantial, spanning two process nodes and multiple generations of Intel design. The i5-5250U is built on Broadwell architecture with a 14 nm process node, while the i7-3520M uses Ivy Bridge on 22 nm. This process advantage gives the i5-5250U a transistor count of 1,900 million on a 133 mm² die, whereas the i7-3520M's transistor count is not specified in the data, though its die size is smaller at 118 mm².

Clock speeds tell an important story. The i7-3520M runs at a base clock of 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, while the i5-5250U operates at just 1.60 GHz base and 2.70 GHz boost. This 1.30 GHz base clock advantage and 0.90 GHz boost advantage for the i7-3520M helps explain its Cinebench dominance. However, the i5-5250U compensates with a dramatically lower TDP of 15 watts versus 35 watts for the i7-3520M, suggesting the Broadwell chip achieves its Geekbench scores with less than half the power budget.

Cache configurations also differ. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache is larger on the i7-3520M at 4 MB shared versus 3 MB shared for the i5-5250U. The i7-3520M also uses an older Intel BGA 1023 socket, while the i5-5250U fits the Intel BGA 1168 socket. Integrated graphics differ as well: the i5-5250U includes Intel HD 6000, while the i7-3520M ships with Intel HD 4000. Memory support is listed as DDR3 for the i5-5250U with dual-channel configuration and 29.9 GB/s bandwidth; the i7-3520M's memory type and bandwidth are unspecified, though it also uses dual-channel memory. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Why does the i7-3520M win all Cinebench tests despite the i5-5250U having a newer architecture?

A: The i7-3520M has significantly higher clock speeds (2.90 GHz base, 3.60 GHz boost versus 1.60 GHz base, 2.70 GHz boost) and 1 MB more L3 cache (4 MB versus 3 MB). These factors appear to outweigh the process node advantage of the i5-5250U's 14 nm Broadwell design in Cinebench's rendering workloads.

Q: How can the i5-5250U be so much faster in Geekbench when it loses in Cinebench?

A: The Geekbench results show a 37.3% multicore and 44.7% singlecore advantage for the i5-5250U. This suggests the Broadwell architecture's efficiency improvements and newer instruction handling provide substantial benefits in the types of tasks Geekbench measures, even at lower clock speeds.

Q: Which processor has a better overall average benchmark score?

A: The i5-5250U has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 856 compared to 843 for the i7-3520M, a difference of about 1.5%. Both processors sit at the 23rd percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are in the same overall performance tier.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two mobile processors?

A: The i5-5250U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the i7-3520M has a TDP of 35 watts. The i5-5250U achieves its Geekbench victories while consuming less than half the power budget of the i7-3520M.

Q: Are these processors from the same generation?

A: No. The i5-5250U is from the Core i5 (Broadwell-U) generation released in 2015, while the i7-3520M is from the Core i7 (Ivy Bridge) generation released in 2012. They also use different sockets: BGA 1168 for the i5-5250U and BGA 1023 for the i7-3520M.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The i7-3520M has a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, which is 0.90 GHz higher than the i5-5250U's boost clock of 2.70 GHz. The i7-3520M also has a 1.30 GHz higher base clock at 2.90 GHz versus 1.60 GHz.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but complex verdict. The i7-3520M is the stronger choice for Cinebench-style rendering workloads, winning all five tests with a consistent ~14% margin. Its higher clock speeds and larger L3 cache provide a reliable advantage in these scenarios. The i5-5250U, however, offers a transformative advantage in Geekbench, with singlecore performance that is 44.7% higher and multicore performance that is 37.3% higher.

For users running applications that resemble Geekbench's test patterns, the i5-5250U is the clear winner, especially given its 15 watt TDP versus 35 watts for the i7-3520M. The efficiency difference is substantial: the i5-5250U achieves its Geekbench dominance using less than half the power. For users whose workloads resemble Cinebench's rendering tasks, the i7-3520M's consistent lead makes it the more reliable performer.

The average benchmark scores suggest these processors are nearly equivalent overall, with the i5-5250U holding a slim 1.5% edge. Both are end-of-life mobile parts in the 23rd percentile of all CPUs, so neither represents state-of-the-art performance. The i7-3520M's launch MSRP was $315, while no launch MSRP is listed for the i5-5250U. The production status for the i7-3520M is not specified, but the i5-5250U is marked as end-of-life.

Specification Differences

• Base Clock: 1600.00 MHz (i5-5250U) vs 2900.00 MHz (i7-3520M)
• Boost Clock: 2.70 GHz (i5-5250U) vs 3.60 GHz (i7-3520M)
• TDP: 15 W (i5-5250U) vs 35 W (i7-3520M)
• Socket: Intel BGA 1168 (i5-5250U) vs Intel BGA 1023 (i7-3520M)
• Architecture: Broadwell (i5-5250U) vs Ivy Bridge (i7-3520M)
• Process Node: 14 nm (i5-5250U) vs 22 nm (i7-3520M)
• Die Size: 133 mm² (i5-5250U) vs 118 mm² (i7-3520M)
• L3 Cache: 3 MB shared (i5-5250U) vs 4 MB shared (i7-3520M)
• Memory Bandwidth: 29.9 GB/s (i5-5250U) vs not specified (i7-3520M)
• Integrated Graphics: Intel HD 6000 (i5-5250U) vs Intel HD 4000 (i7-3520M)
• Release Date: 2015-02-28 (i5-5250U) vs 2012-06-02 (i7-3520M)
• Part Number: SR26C (i5-5250U) vs SR0MU (i7-3520M)

Where Each One Wins

The i7-3520M wins in all rendering-oriented scenarios. Its five Cinebench victories span every version of the test in the data, from R15 through R23, covering both singlecore and multicore workloads. The consistent ~14% margin across all Cinebench tests indicates the i7-3520M's higher clock speeds translate directly into better performance in these compute-heavy tasks. This makes it the preferred choice for users running 3D rendering, video encoding, or other CPU-intensive creative applications that follow Cinebench's workload patterns.

The i5-5250U wins decisively in Geekbench, which measures a broader range of everyday computing scenarios. Its 44.7% singlecore advantage is particularly notable, suggesting better performance in tasks that depend heavily on single-threaded responsiveness. The 37.3% multicore advantage combined with a 15 watt TDP means the i5-5250U delivers superior performance per watt in these workloads. This makes it the better choice for users who prioritize battery life in mobile devices while still needing strong general-purpose performance for tasks like web browsing, office productivity, and light content creation.

The i5-5250U also wins on efficiency by a wide margin, consuming 20 watts less than the i7-3520M while achieving higher average benchmark scores (856 versus 843). For mobile platforms where thermals and battery life are critical constraints, this efficiency advantage is arguably more important than raw rendering performance. The data suggests the i5-5250U is the more balanced modern choice, while the i7-3520M remains a capable option for users who specifically need maximum rendering throughput in a legacy platform.