Intel Core i5-7500 vs Intel Core i5-8250U Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-8250U has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-7500 has 4 threads. Both have 4 physical cores.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-7500 scores 5133, which is 4.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-8250U's 4918 in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: Which chip wins in PassMark integer math?

A: The Intel Core i5-8250U wins PassMark integer math with a score of 20885, which is 32.5% higher than the Intel Core i5-7500's 15768.

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

A: The Intel Core i5-8250U has an average benchmark score of 8577, while the Intel Core i5-7500 has an average benchmark score of 8208. Both sit at the 64th percentile versus all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-7500 has a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, compared to the Intel Core i5-8250U's 3.40 GHz boost clock.

Q: Are both processors built on the same process node?

A: Yes, both are built on Intel's 14 nm process node and both use the Kaby Lake architecture. The 8250U is part of the Kaby Lake-R refresh.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-8250U and Intel Core i5-7500 share the same fundamental silicon generation: both are Kaby Lake parts fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process. The core counts match at 4 physical cores, and both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The significant architectural divergence lies in threading. The 8250U enables Hyper-Threading, giving it 8 threads, while the 7500 is a straight 4-core, 4-thread design. This changes how the two chips handle parallel workloads. The 8250U also carries the Kaby Lake-R codename, indicating it is the refreshed mobile variant of the architecture. The 7500 is the original Kaby Lake desktop part.

Clock behavior separates them further. The 8250U has a base clock of 1600 MHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, a wide range typical of a low-power mobile chip. The 7500 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, a much higher floor with a narrower boost window. The thermal design power reflects this: the 8250U is rated at 15 W, while the 7500 is rated at 65 W, a difference of 50 W. That power envelope explains the 8250U's far lower base clock: it is designed to fit into thin and light notebooks, while the 7500 is a desktop part with room for active cooling.

The sockets differ as well. The 8250U uses Intel BGA 1356, a soldered mobile socket, whereas the 7500 uses Intel Socket 1151, a desktop socket. The integrated graphics also differ: the 8250U has UHD 620, and the 7500 has HD 630. Both support DDR4 memory. The 7500's memory bus is dual-channel with a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s; the 8250U's memory bus and bandwidth are not recorded in the database. The 7500 also has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), a field not listed for the 8250U.

The die size is recorded only for the 8250U at 123 mm². The 7500's die size is not listed. The 8250U was released on 2017-08-20, and the 7500 was released on 2017-01-02. The part numbers are SR3LA for the 8250U and SR335 for the 7500. Both processors are listed as Active in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear pattern: the desktop part wins the majority of tests, but the mobile part has specific strengths. Out of 17 recorded comparisons, the 7500 wins 14, while the 8250U wins 3.

The Cinebench suite is uniformly in favor of the 7500. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 7500 scores 517 against 495, a 4.3% advantage. Single-core R15 is 72 against 69, a 4.2% edge. R20 multi-core is 2155 against 2065, again 4.2%. R20 single-core is 304 against 291, a 4.3% difference. R23 multi-core is 5133 against 4918, a 4.2% gap, and R23 single-core is 724 against 694, a 4.1% gap. The margins are consistent, hovering around 4% in every Cinebench test. This suggests the 7500's higher clocks translate into a steady, modest advantage across both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads, even though the 8250U has twice the thread count.

PassMark tests show a more varied picture. The 7500 wins PassMark data compression with 83250 against 76521, an 8.1% margin. It also wins PassMark extended instructions by a wide margin: 6971 against 4920, which is 29.4% ahead. The largest single gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the 7500 scores 28 against 18, a 35.7% lead. The 7500 also wins PassMark floating point math (13174 vs 12706, 3.6%), PassMark multithread (6028 vs 5812, 3.6%), PassMark physics (471 vs 405, 14%), and PassMark single-thread (2253 vs 1886, 16.3%).

The 8250U's wins are concentrated in workloads where its extra threads matter. PassMark integer math is its best result: 20885 against 15768, a 32.5% advantage. It also wins PassMark data encryption with 1979 against 1817, an 8.9% edge, and PassMark random string sorting with 10257 against 10134, a narrower 1.2% margin.

The data shows that the 7500's clock advantage dominates most workloads, but the 8250U's Hyper-Threading gives it a decisive edge in integer-heavy and encryption tasks. The 29.4% and 35.7% losses for the 8250U in extended instructions and prime number finding are notable, as they indicate the 7500's higher per-core throughput is not fully compensated by the extra threads in those specific tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several recorded specification fields. The 8250U has 8 threads; the 7500 has 4. The 8250U's base clock is 1600 MHz; the 7500's is 3.40 GHz. The 8250U's boost clock is 3.40 GHz; the 7500's is 3.80 GHz. The TDP is 15 W for the 8250U and 65 W for the 7500.

The socket is another difference: Intel BGA 1356 for the 8250U versus Intel Socket 1151 for the 7500. The codename differs: Kaby Lake-R for the 8250U versus Kaby Lake for the 7500. The generation field also differs: the 8250U is listed as Core i5 (Kaby Lake-U Refresh), and the 7500 is listed as Core i5 (Kaby Lake). The integrated graphics are UHD 620 on the 8250U and HD 630 on the 7500. The market segment is Mobile for the 8250U and Desktop for the 7500.

The die size is recorded as 123 mm² for the 8250U; no die size is recorded for the 7500. The memory bus is listed as dual-channel with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth for the 7500; neither field is recorded for the 8250U. The 7500 has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) recorded; the 8250U has no PCIe entry. The release dates differ: 2017-08-20 for the 8250U and 2017-01-02 for the 7500. The part numbers are SR3LA and SR335, respectively.

Fields that are the same include cores (4), L1 cache (64 KB per core), L2 cache (256 KB per core), L3 cache (6 MB shared), process node (14 nm), foundry (Intel), memory support (DDR4), ECC support (false), multiplier unlocked (false), and production status (Active).

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core i5-7500 as the stronger performer in the majority of benchmark tests. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, and its margins in Cinebench are consistent at around 4% across every render test. The 7500 also holds substantial leads in extended instructions (29.4%), prime number finding (35.7%), and single-thread performance (16.3%). For users running rendering workloads, compression, physics, or any task that depends on high per-core clocks, the 7500 is the clear choice based on the data.

The Intel Core i5-8250U is not without its own wins. Its 32.5% lead in integer math is the largest margin of any test in either direction. It also wins encryption by 8.9% and random string sorting by 1.2%. These results indicate that the 8250U's 8 threads provide a real benefit in specific parallel workloads, particularly those that are integer-heavy. The 8250U also achieves a higher average benchmark score of 8577 compared to the 7500's 8208, despite losing most individual tests. This is because the 8250U's wins are large, while the 7500's wins are mostly modest, with the exception of the extended instructions and prime number tests.

The choice depends on the workload profile. The 7500 is the safer pick for general-purpose performance, especially for single-threaded tasks and rendering. The 8250U is the better pick for integer math, encryption, and random string sorting, where its thread count outweighs its lower clocks. The 8250U also carries the advantage of a 15 W TDP, making it suitable for mobile systems, while the 7500's 65 W TDP ties it to desktop platforms.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-7500 wins in: Cinebench R15 multi-core (517 vs 495, 4.3% ahead), Cinebench R15 single-core (72 vs 69, 4.2%), Cinebench R20 multi-core (2155 vs 2065, 4.2%), Cinebench R20 single-core (304 vs 291, 4.3%), Cinebench R23 multi-core (5133 vs 4918, 4.2%), Cinebench R23 single-core (724 vs 694, 4.1%), PassMark data compression (83250 vs 76521, 8.1%), PassMark extended instructions (6971 vs 4920, 29.4%), PassMark find prime numbers (28 vs 18, 35.7%), PassMark floating point math (13174 vs 12706, 3.6%), PassMark multithread (6028 vs 5812, 3.6%), PassMark physics (471 vs 405, 14%), PassMark single-thread (2253 vs 1886, 16.3%). These wins cover rendering, compression, physics simulation, extended instruction sets, prime number calculation, and all single-threaded tasks.

Intel Core i5-8250U wins in: PassMark data encryption (1979 vs 1817, 8.9%), PassMark integer math (20885 vs 15768, 32.5%), PassMark random string sorting (10257 vs 10134, 1.2%). These wins are narrower in count but include the largest single margin in the entire comparison. The integer math result is particularly striking: a 32.5% lead over a desktop chip with much higher clocks. Encryption and string sorting also favor the 8-thread mobile part, suggesting that workloads with high parallel integer throughput benefit from the 8250U's thread count.