Intel Core i5-L16G7 vs Intel Core i7-3520M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data paints a strikingly one-sided picture. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins every single head-to-head comparison in the database, taking all five Cinebench tests outright. The Intel Core i7-3520M does not claim a single victory in any of the shared benchmarks, meaning its strengths lie entirely outside the measured workload set.

The i5-L16G7’s dominance is consistent and narrow. In multi-threaded tests, it leads by roughly 13% across the board: Cinebench R15 multicore shows 281 versus 244 (a 13.2% gap), Cinebench R20 multicore shows 1173 versus 1018 (also 13.2%), and Cinebench R23 multicore shows 2793 versus 2426 (13.1%). The single-core results follow the same pattern, with the i5-L16G7 ahead by 13.3% in Cinebench R20 single-core (165 versus 143) and 13.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core (394 versus 342). This uniformity suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

That said, the i7-3520M is not without context. Its average benchmark score of 843 places it in the 23rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-L16G7 averages 816 and sits in the 22nd percentile. In absolute terms, the two processors are nearly identical in overall standing, separated by just 27 points on average. The i5-L16G7’s wins are real but modest, and neither chip is a performance leader by modern standards.

Where the i7-3520M would logically win is in scenarios not represented in the head-to-head set. The database records Geekbench scores for the i7-3520M (1156 multi-core, 570 single-core) but no Geekbench results for the i5-L16G7, so no direct comparison is possible. Similarly, the i7-3520M supports dual-channel memory, while the i5-L16G7 is limited to single-channel; in memory-sensitive workloads, the older chip’s memory bus configuration would likely tip the balance, though no numerical evidence exists in the shared test suite.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies, separated by a decade of Intel engineering. The i7-3520M is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, a 22 nm process, with a die size of 118 mm². It features 2 physical cores and 4 threads, running at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is conventional: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The thermal design power is 35 watts, which is typical for a mobile part of its era.

The i5-L16G7, by contrast, is a Lakefield part manufactured on a 10 nm process, with a die size of 82 mm² and 4,050 million transistors. It uses a hybrid architecture with 5 cores and 5 threads, a base clock of 1400.00 MHz (note the unusual precision in the database) and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The cache layout is different: 80 KB of L1 total, 512 KB of L2 total, and 4 MB of shared L3. The TDP is dramatically lower at 7 watts, reflecting its ultra-mobile target. It supports LPDDR4X memory over a single-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 17.1 GB/s. The i7-3520M’s memory bus is dual-channel, but the database does not record a bandwidth figure for it.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i7-3520M carries Intel HD 4000, while the i5-L16G7 features UHD Graphics 64EU. The database records no graphics benchmarks for either, so any comparison must remain qualitative. The i5-L16G7 also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-3520M’s PCIe configuration is unlisted.

Another notable distinction is transistor count. The i5-L16G7 packs 4,050 million transistors into its smaller die, a direct consequence of the denser 10 nm process. The i7-3520M’s transistor count is unrecorded, but its 22 nm process and larger die imply a far lower figure. The i5-L16G7 is also marked as end-of-life in production status, whereas the i7-3520M’s status is unlisted. The i7-3520M uses socket Intel BGA 1023; the i5-L16G7 has no socket listed, likely due to its soldered ultra-mobile design.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Core i5-L16G7 is the superior processor in every measured workload. It wins all five Cinebench tests, with a consistent 13% advantage in both single-core and multi-core performance. If the choice is between these two for a workload that resembles Cinebench rendering, the i5-L16G7 is the clear pick.

However, the i7-3520M is not without arguments in its favor, though those arguments rely on data outside the head-to-head set. Its dual-channel memory bus is a structural advantage over the i5-L16G7’s single-channel configuration, and its 35 W TDP suggests it is designed for sustained performance in a larger chassis, whereas the i5-L16G7’s 7 W TDP is aimed at fanless or near-fanless designs. The i7-3520M also has a higher boost clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.00 GHz), which could matter in burst workloads, though the benchmark results show the i5-L16G7 still wins in single-core tests despite the lower clock.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical: the i7-3520M sits at the 23rd percentile, the i5-L16G7 at the 22nd. Their average benchmark scores are close (843 versus 816). This means the i5-L16G7’s victories are not transformative; it is merely the better of two similar-performing parts. For users prioritizing raw Cinebench scores, the i5-L16G7 is the answer. For users who need dual-channel memory bandwidth or a conventional socket, the i7-3520M remains viable, but the data does not support it as a performance winner.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The Intel Core i7-3520M has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any benchmark?

A: The largest gap is 13.3% in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i5-L16G7 scores 165 versus the i7-3520M’s 143. The other tests show gaps between 13.1% and 13.2%.

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-3520M averages 843, and the i5-L16G7 averages 816. The i7-3520M is slightly higher despite losing every head-to-head test, because the database includes Geekbench scores for the i7-3520M but not for the i5-L16G7.

Q: Which processor has a lower thermal design power?

A: The i5-L16G7 has a TDP of 7 watts. The i7-3520M has a TDP of 35 watts, which is five times higher.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The i5-L16G7 supports LPDDR4X memory with a single-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 17.1 GB/s. The i7-3520M supports dual-channel memory, but the database does not list a specific memory type or bandwidth.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the i7-3520M wins?

A: In the head-to-head benchmark set, no. The i5-L16G7 wins all five Cinebench tests. The i7-3520M has recorded Geekbench scores (1156 multi-core, 570 single-core), but no corresponding Geekbench results exist for the i5-L16G7 in the database, so no comparison is possible.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is remarkably uniform. Every single test favors the Intel Core i5-L16G7, and the margin is almost constant at 13%. This consistency suggests a systematic advantage in both single-threaded and multi-threaded execution, likely stemming from the newer 10 nm architecture and higher transistor count.

Starting with Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-L16G7 scores 281 against the i7-3520M’s 244. The delta is 13.2% in favor of the i5-L16G7. This is the only R15 test in the shared set; the i7-3520M has no recorded R15 single-core score, and the i5-L16G7 does have one (89.5), but it is not part of the head-to-head table.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. In multicore, the i5-L16G7 records 1173, the i7-3520M records 1018, a 13.2% gap. In single-core, the i5-L16G7 scores 165, the i7-3520M scores 143, a 13.3% gap. These are the two closest margins in the entire set, and they show that the i5-L16G7 does not sacrifice single-thread performance to achieve its multi-threaded lead.

Cinebench R23 repeats the trend. Multicore: 2793 for the i5-L16G7, 2426 for the i7-3520M, a 13.1% difference. Single-core: 394 for the i5-L16G7, 342 for the i7-3520M, a 13.2% difference. The R23 multicore gap is the smallest of the five, but only by a tenth of a percentage point.

The biggest win for the i5-L16G7 is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where it leads by 13.3%. The smallest win is in Cinebench R23 multicore, at 13.1%. Between those extremes, the other three tests sit at 13.2%. There is no test where the i7-3520M comes within even 10% of its rival.

The i7-3520M’s nearest rivals in the database help contextualize its position. It is within 0.1% of the AMD FX-8800P (both average 843), 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-920 (840), 0.4% of the Intel Xeon X5470 (839), and 0.6% of the Intel Core i5-3380M (838). The i5-L16G7, meanwhile, is within 0.1% of the Intel Xeon X3440 (815), 0.4% of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 (813), 0.4% of the Intel Core i7-5550U (813), and 0.5% behind the Intel Xeon E5540 (820). These rival comparisons show both chips in the same performance tier, even though the head-to-head results give the i5-L16G7 a clear edge.

In short, the data is unambiguous. The i5-L16G7 wins every shared benchmark, with a consistent 13% margin across all five tests. The i7-3520M’s only consolation is its slightly higher average score, driven by Geekbench results that have no counterpart for the i5-L16G7. For anyone comparing these two directly, the i5-L16G7 is the faster processor in the measured workloads.