Intel Core i5-6500T vs Intel Core i7-3820QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3820QM and Intel Core i5-6500T present a striking contrast in benchmark behavior, with the older mobile quad-core claiming victory in the Cinebench suite while the newer desktop chip dominates Geekbench. Across the eight head-to-head benchmarks, the i7-3820QM wins six tests, while the i5-6500T takes two, but the magnitude of those wins tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count suggests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are remarkably consistent in favor of the i7-3820QM. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-3820QM scores 481 against the i5-6500T’s 408, a 17.9% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap: 67 versus 57, a 17.5% lead. This pattern repeats almost exactly in the R20 suite, where the i7-3820QM posts 2006 multi-core and 283 single-core scores, beating the i5-6500T’s 1702 and 240 by 17.9% in both cases. The R23 results follow suit, with the i7-3820QM scoring 4777 multi-core and 674 single-core, compared to the i5-6500T’s 4054 and 572 — again a 17.8% margin on both tests.

The consistency of these Cinebench deltas is notable. Across all six Cinebench tests, the i7-3820QM’s advantage hovers tightly between 17.5% and 17.9%, indicating a stable architectural or configuration-driven edge rather than benchmark-specific noise. This uniformity suggests the i7-3820QM’s higher base clock of 2.70 GHz and boost clock of 3.70 GHz, combined with its 8 threads, provide a reliable throughput advantage in these rendering workloads.

The Geekbench results flip the narrative entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the i5-6500T scores 2843 against the i7-3820QM’s 2041, representing a 28.2% lead for the desktop part. The single-core gap is even larger: the i5-6500T’s 1016 dwarfs the i7-3820QM’s 601, a 40.8% difference. These are substantial margins, far exceeding any of the Cinebench deltas in the opposite direction. The i5-6500T’s newer Skylake architecture clearly excels in the integer and floating-point workloads that Geekbench emphasizes, where per-core efficiency matters more than raw thread count.

When viewed against their respective nearest rivals, both processors sit at essentially the same performance tier. The i7-3820QM has an average benchmark score of 1366, landing within 0.3% of the Intel Xeon D-1521 and 0.2% of the Intel Xeon E5-1410 v2. The i5-6500T’s average of 1362 is statistically identical, matching the Intel Core i5-8365UE exactly and trailing the Xeon D-1521 by just 0.4%. Both CPUs occupy the 36th percentile among all CPUs, confirming that despite their divergent benchmark profiles, they deliver comparable overall performance.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-3820QM is the clear choice for multithreaded rendering workloads. Its six Cinebench victories, all by roughly 18%, demonstrate a consistent edge in 3D rendering and animation tasks that rely heavily on CPU compute. The 8 threads provided by Hyper-Threading give it a structural advantage in parallel workloads, allowing it to process more render tasks simultaneously. Users running Cinebench-like applications — video rendering, 3D model processing, or batch image manipulation — will see meaningfully faster completion times with the i7-3820QM.

The i5-6500T’s wins are concentrated in Geekbench, which measures a broader mix of everyday tasks including encryption, compression, memory operations, and integer arithmetic. The 40.8% single-core advantage is particularly telling for responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. Web browsing, office productivity, and general system interaction all benefit from strong single-core performance, and the i5-6500T delivers that in spades. The 28.2% multi-core lead in Geekbench also indicates that even in parallel workloads, the newer Skylake architecture’s efficiency can overcome the i7-3820QM’s thread advantage.

The use-case split is clear. Content creators and renderers should prefer the i7-3820QM. Users whose workloads involve a mix of general computing, application launching, and single-threaded tasks will find the i5-6500T more responsive. The i5-6500T’s lower TDP of 35 watts versus the i7-3820QM’s 45 watts also makes it more suitable for compact or thermally constrained builds, though both are classified as low-power parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and manufacturing nodes. The i7-3820QM uses Intel’s Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process, with a die size of 160 mm² and 1,400 million transistors. The i5-6500T employs Skylake on a 14 nm node, with a smaller die size of 122 mm². The newer 14 nm process allows for greater transistor density and efficiency, which partially explains the i5-6500T’s superior single-core performance despite its lower clock speeds.

Core and thread configurations differ significantly. Both have 4 physical cores, but the i7-3820QM supports 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the i5-6500T has only 4 threads. This explains the Cinebench multi-core results, where the i7-3820QM’s extra threads provide a consistent edge. The cache hierarchy is also different: the i7-3820QM has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-6500T has 6 MB. Both share the same L1 and L2 cache sizes of 64 KB and 256 KB per core respectively.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i7-3820QM ships with Intel HD 4000, while the i5-6500T includes HD Graphics 530, a newer generation. Memory support varies: the i5-6500T explicitly supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the i7-3820QM’s memory support is unspecified in the data, though it does use a dual-channel memory bus. The i5-6500T also has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, whereas the i7-3820QM’s PCIe configuration is not documented.

Physical specifications diverge substantially. The i7-3820QM uses the Intel BGA 1224 socket and targets the mobile market, while the i5-6500T uses Intel Socket 1151 and is a desktop part. The i5-6500T is marked as end-of-life, while the i7-3820QM’s production status is not specified. Clock speeds favor the i7-3820QM: its 2.70 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost exceed the i5-6500T’s 2.50 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i7-3820QM has higher clock speeds, with a 2.70 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost, compared to the i5-6500T’s 2.50 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same number of cores?

A: Yes, both have 4 physical cores. However, the i7-3820QM supports 8 threads through Hyper-Threading, while the i5-6500T has only 4 threads.

Q: How do the Cinebench R23 scores compare?

A: The i7-3820QM scores 4777 multi-core and 674 single-core, while the i5-6500T scores 4054 multi-core and 572 single-core, giving the i7-3820QM a 17.8% advantage in both tests.

Q: Which processor performs better in Geekbench?

A: The i5-6500T is significantly better in Geekbench, scoring 2843 multi-core and 1016 single-core, compared to the i7-3820QM’s 2041 and 601 — a 28.2% and 40.8% lead respectively.

Q: What are the TDP ratings of these CPUs?

A: The i7-3820QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the i5-6500T has a lower TDP of 35 watts.

Q: Which socket does each processor use?

A: The i7-3820QM uses the Intel BGA 1224 socket, while the i5-6500T uses Intel Socket 1151.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different user profiles. The i7-3820QM is the superior choice for render-heavy workloads, with its 17.8-17.9% advantage across all Cinebench tests making it the obvious pick for 3D artists, video editors, or anyone running CPU-bound rendering pipelines. Its 8 threads and higher clock speeds provide a consistent multithreaded advantage that the i5-6500T cannot match in these specific applications.

The i5-6500T is the better all-rounder for general desktop use. Its 40.8% single-core Geekbench lead translates to snappier application launches, faster web rendering, and smoother everyday multitasking. The 28.2% multi-core Geekbench advantage further suggests that even in parallel general-purpose workloads, the Skylake architecture’s efficiency outweighs the i7-3820QM’s extra threads. Its lower 35-watt TDP and support for DDR4 memory make it a more modern and efficient platform choice for a desktop build.

For users constrained to a mobile platform, the i7-3820QM is the only option of the two, given its BGA 1224 socket and mobile market segment. Desktop builders should favor the i5-6500T for its superior Geekbench performance, modern 14 nm architecture, and lower power draw, unless their primary workload is specifically Cinebench-style rendering, in which case the i7-3820QM’s consistent 18% edge justifies its higher thread count.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-3820QM | Intel Core i5-6500T |

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

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1224 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Skylake |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | 122 mm² |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | Not specified |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | Not specified | DDR3, DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 34.1 GB/s |

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4000 | HD Graphics 530 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Not specified | End-of-life |

| Part Number | SR0MK | SR2L8 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 1366 | 1362 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 36 | 36 |