Intel Core i5-7640X vs Intel Core i7-5950HQ Comparison

The Intel Core i5-7640X and Intel Core i7-5950HQ present a fascinating split decision. The i7-5950HQ dominates in Cinebench rendering workloads, winning all six tests by a consistent 7.4% to 7.6% margin, while the i5-7640X counters with decisive victories in Geekbench, particularly a 28.3% lead in single-core performance. Neither chip holds a universal advantage; the data reveals two distinct performance profiles that cater to different workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent within each test suite, suggesting a fundamental architectural advantage rather than workload-specific quirks. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-5950HQ scores 656 against the i5-7640X’s 607, a 7.5% deficit for the desktop part. This pattern repeats across every Cinebench iteration: R15 single-core shows 92 vs 85 (7.6% behind), R20 multicore shows 2736 vs 2533 (7.4% behind), R20 single-core shows 386 vs 357 (7.5% behind), R23 multicore shows 6516 vs 6031 (7.4% behind), and R23 single-core shows 920 vs 851 (7.5% behind). The consistency is striking—the i7-5950HQ’s advantage hovers within a narrow 0.2 percentage point band across all six Cinebench tests, regardless of core count or generation of the benchmark.

The story flips dramatically in Geekbench. The i5-7640X posts 5137 in multicore versus the i7-5950HQ’s 4601, a substantial 11.6% lead. The single-core gap is even more pronounced: 1736 versus 1353, a 28.3% advantage for the i5-7640X. This is not a marginal difference; it represents a fundamentally different performance character. The i5-7640X excels in Geekbench’s workload mix, which tends to emphasize bursty, latency-sensitive operations, while the i7-5950HQ’s extra threads and different microarchitecture carry the day in sustained rendering tasks.

Examining the average benchmark scores reinforces the near-parity overall. The i5-7640X averages 2167 across all tests, while the i7-5950HQ averages 2158—a difference of only 0.4%. Both chips sit at the 47th percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier despite their divergent strengths. The nearest rivals list confirms this: the i5-7640X’s closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 5 3400GE at 2175 (0.3% ahead), while the i7-5950HQ’s nearest neighbor is the Intel Core i5-10200H at 2154 (only 0.2% behind). They are effectively equals in aggregate, yet wildly different in specific workloads.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but conditional recommendation. For rendering workloads—anything that scales with threads and sustained compute—the Intel Core i7-5950HQ is the superior choice. It wins every Cinebench test by roughly 7.5%, which is a meaningful margin in professional content creation. The i7-5950HQ’s 8 threads versus the i5-7640X’s 4 threads directly explain this advantage, allowing it to process more parallel work in Cinebench’s heavily threaded rendering engine.

Conversely, for general-purpose computing, responsiveness, and single-threaded applications, the Intel Core i5-7640X is the better pick. Its 28.3% single-core Geekbench lead is the largest margin in this entire comparison, indicating a significant advantage in latency-sensitive tasks. The i5-7640X also wins Geekbench multicore by 11.6%, suggesting that its higher clock speeds (4.30 GHz boost versus 3.80 GHz) matter more than the i7-5950HQ’s extra threads in this particular benchmark suite.

If forced to choose based solely on aggregate performance, the difference is negligible—0.4% in favor of the i5-7640X. However, no user should buy either chip for aggregate performance; they should buy for their specific workload. The i7-5950HQ is the rendering specialist, while the i5-7640X is the general-purpose performer with a strong single-core edge. The i7-5950HQ’s mobile BGA socket and end-of-life production status also make it a less practical choice for new desktop builds, but the data itself does not penalize it for those factors.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different market segments. The i5-7640X is built on Kaby Lake, specifically the Kaby Lake-X variant, and belongs to Intel’s X-Series 7th Gen desktop family. It uses the Intel Socket 2066 platform, which supports quad-channel DDR4 memory and a Gen 3 PCIe interface. The i7-5950HQ, in contrast, is a Broadwell-H mobile part, using the Intel BGA 1364 socket, dual-channel DDR3 memory, and a Gen 3 PCIe interface limited to 16 lanes from the CPU.

Both chips are manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process node, so process technology does not explain the performance differences. The i7-5950HQ does have a documented die size of 182 mm², while the i5-7640X’s die size is not provided. The architectural lineage differs significantly: Kaby Lake is a refinement of Intel’s Skylake architecture, while Broadwell was the first 14 nm Intel architecture and a precursor to Skylake. This generational gap explains why the i5-7640X achieves higher clock speeds—3.90 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost versus 2.90 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost—despite the i7-5950HQ being the more powerful rendering chip.

The i7-5950HQ includes integrated Iris Pro Graphics 6200, while the i5-7640X has no integrated graphics at all. This is a significant feature difference: the desktop part requires a discrete GPU, while the mobile part can drive displays on its own. The i7-5950HQ also has a locked multiplier, whereas the i5-7640X is multiplier-unlocked, allowing overclocking. The i7-5950HQ carries the part number SR2BJ and was marked end-of-life, while the i5-7640X has no production status listed.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key differences between the two processors. The most obvious is thread count: the i5-7640X has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-5950HQ has 4 cores and 8 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. This doubles the i7-5950HQ’s thread capacity and directly drives its Cinebench wins.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The i5-7640X runs at 3.90 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost, while the i7-5950HQ runs at 2.90 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost—a 1.0 GHz base clock advantage for the desktop part. Thermal design power also contrasts sharply: the i5-7640X has a 112 W TDP, while the i7-5950HQ is rated at just 47 W. This reflects their different market segments (desktop versus mobile) and explains why the i7-5950HQ can operate in thermally constrained environments.

Memory support differs completely. The i5-7640X uses DDR4 memory with a quad-channel bus, while the i7-5950HQ uses DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and a documented memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The i5-7640X’s memory bandwidth is not specified, but the quad-channel configuration implies significantly higher theoretical throughput. Neither chip supports ECC memory. The i5-7640X was released on 2017-06-25, while the i7-5950HQ predates it by over two years, launching on 2015-06-01. The i7-5950HQ has a launch MSRP of $623, while the i5-7640X has no listed launch MSRP. The i7-5950HQ also features integrated graphics, the i5-7640X does not.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i7-5950HQ scores 6516 versus the i5-7640X’s 6031, a 7.4% advantage for the mobile part.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap in Geekbench?

A: The i5-7640X leads with 1736 points against the i7-5950HQ’s 1353, representing a 28.3% margin—the largest difference in any benchmark test.

Q: Does the i7-5950HQ have more cores than the i5-7640X?

A: No, both have 4 physical cores, but the i7-5950HQ supports 8 threads while the i5-7640X only supports 4.

Q: What is the aggregate performance difference between the two chips?

A: The i5-7640X averages 2167 across all benchmarks, while the i7-5950HQ averages 2158, a difference of just 0.4% in favor of the desktop part.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i5-7640X boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the i7-5950HQ boosts to 3.80 GHz—a 0.5 GHz advantage for the desktop chip.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, neither the i5-7640X nor the i7-5950HQ supports ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-5950HQ is the clear winner in rendering and multi-threaded content creation. Across every Cinebench test—R15, R20, and R23, both single and multicore—it maintains a consistent 7.4% to 7.6% lead. This makes it the better choice for video encoding, 3D rendering, and any workload that scales with thread count. Its 8 threads versus 4 is the deciding factor, allowing it to process more parallel work despite lower clock speeds. The i7-5950HQ also wins on thermal efficiency, with a 47 W TDP versus 112 W, making it suitable for compact or mobile systems.

The Intel Core i5-7640X wins in Geekbench, both single-core (28.3% ahead) and multicore (11.6% ahead). This indicates superiority in general-purpose computing, application launch times, and single-threaded productivity software. Its higher base and boost clocks—3.90 GHz and 4.30 GHz versus 2.90 GHz and 3.80 GHz—drive these wins. The i5-7640X also offers a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus versus dual-channel DDR3, which could benefit memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads, and its unlocked multiplier allows overclocking for additional performance. The i5-7640X’s lack of integrated graphics is a drawback for systems without a discrete GPU, but for desktop builders with dedicated graphics, it is the more flexible and higher-clocked part.