Intel Core i5-L16G7 vs Intel Core i7-5550U Comparison

The Intel Core i5-L16G7 and Intel Core i7-5550U are both end-of-life mobile processors that land in the same performance tier, but they achieve that status through very different designs. The benchmark data shows the i5-L16G7 holding a consistent edge across every single Cinebench test, while the i7-5550U counters with a higher base clock and dual-channel memory support. Both chips sit at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical — 816 for the i5-L16G7 versus 813 for the i7-5550U. This is a matchup of two aging parts where the newer hybrid architecture of the i5-L16G7 narrowly outperforms the older but more conventional i7-5550U.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i5-L16G7 wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and the margins are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-L16G7 scores 281 against the i7-5550U's 238, a delta of 18.1%. That same pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i5-L16G7 posts 1173 versus 992, an 18.2% advantage. The single-core results tell the same story: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-L16G7 scores 165 compared to 139, a 18.7% lead. Cinebench R23 continues the trend with the i5-L16G7 scoring 2793 in multi-core against 2363, and 394 in single-core against 333 — deltas of 18.2% and 18.3%, respectively.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Every test, regardless of whether it stresses one core or all cores, shows roughly an 18% gap in favor of the i5-L16G7. This suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-dependent. The i5-L16G7's five cores and five threads give it a raw thread-count advantage over the i7-5550U's two cores and four threads. However, the i7-5550U's higher base clock of 2.00 GHz versus 1.40 GHz does not translate into a single-core win — the i5-L16G7's boost clock of 3.00 GHz matches the i7-5550U's boost, and the newer architecture appears to extract more instructions per clock.

Looking at the broader context, the i5-L16G7's average benchmark score of 816 places it just 0.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon X3440 and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775. The i7-5550U, with an average score of 813, sits 0.2% behind the Xeon X3440 and 0.5% ahead of the AMD A10-6800K. The two chips are effectively inseparable in aggregate performance, yet the i5-L16G7 wins every direct comparison. This is a case where the newer part's efficiency and thread count overcome the older part's clock speed advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-L16G7 wins everywhere in the benchmark data — there are no tests where the i7-5550U comes out ahead. The multi-core wins are expected given the i5-L16G7's 5 cores versus 2 cores, but the single-core wins are more surprising. The i5-L16G7's single-core score of 394 in Cinebench R23 is 18.3% higher than the i7-5550U's 333, despite both chips having a 3.00 GHz boost clock. This indicates the i5-L16G7's Lakefield architecture delivers better per-clock performance than the older Broadwell design.

The i7-5550U's strengths lie outside the Cinebench suite. It has a higher base clock at 2.00 GHz, which could help in lightly threaded tasks that don't boost well. It also supports dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, compared to the i5-L16G7's single-channel 17.1 GB/s. For memory-sensitive workloads, the i7-5550U could plausibly narrow the gap, though the benchmark data does not capture this. The i7-5550U also has a larger die at 133 mm² versus 82 mm², and it uses a socketed design (Intel BGA 1168) rather than being soldered.

For raw compute throughput, the i5-L16G7 is the clear winner. Its 5 threads allow it to spread work across more execution units, and the benchmark results confirm this advantage. The i7-5550U's only potential edge is in memory bandwidth and base clock stability, which are not reflected in the Cinebench scores. In practical terms, the i5-L16G7 is the better choice for multi-threaded rendering or encoding, while the i7-5550U might handle memory-bound tasks more gracefully.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The i5-L16G7 is built on Intel's Lakefield architecture, which uses a 10 nm process node and packs 4,050 million transistors into an 82 mm² die. It features 5 cores and 5 threads with a hybrid configuration — one high-performance core paired with four efficiency cores, though the FACT PACK does not detail this hybrid arrangement. The i7-5550U uses the older Broadwell architecture on a 14 nm node, with 1,900 million transistors across a 133 mm² die. The i5-L16G7's transistor density is significantly higher, which explains how it fits more cores into a smaller area.

Cache configurations differ as well. The i5-L16G7 has 80 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache, while the i7-5550U lists 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. Both chips share 4 MB of L3 cache. The i5-L16G7's smaller die and newer node allow for more efficient power delivery, reflected in its 7 W TDP versus the i7-5550U's 15 W TDP. This is a substantial difference — the i5-L16G7 uses less than half the power budget of the i7-5550U while delivering better benchmark scores.

Memory support is another divider. The i5-L16G7 uses LPDDR4X with a single-channel bus and 17.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-5550U supports DDR3 with dual-channel access and 29.9 GB/s. The i7-5550U's memory bandwidth is 75% higher, which could matter for integrated graphics performance or memory-intensive applications. PCIe support also differs: the i5-L16G7 offers Gen 3 with 6 lanes, while the i7-5550U provides Gen 2 with 12 lanes. The newer PCIe standard on the i5-L16G7 offers more bandwidth per lane, but the i7-5550U has more total lanes.

Integrated graphics are different as well. The i5-L16G7 ships with UHD Graphics with 64 execution units, while the i7-5550U uses Intel HD 6000. The i5-L16G7's graphics are more modern and likely more capable, though the FACT PACK does not provide benchmark numbers for GPU performance. The i7-5550U has a release date of February 2015, while the i5-L16G7's release date is not listed. Both chips are end-of-life and locked (multiplier unlocked is false for both).

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins all multi-core tests. It scores 281 versus 238 in Cinebench R15, 1173 versus 992 in R20, and 2793 versus 2363 in R23. The advantage ranges from 18.1% to 18.2% across these tests.

Q: Does the i7-5550U win any benchmark?

A: No. According to the head-to-head data, the i5-L16G7 wins all five comparisons (Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core). The i7-5550U records zero wins.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i5-L16G7 has an average benchmark score of 816, while the i7-5550U scores 813. The difference is 0.4% in favor of the i5-L16G7, and both chips are at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A: The i5-L16G7 has a TDP of 7 W, while the i7-5550U has a TDP of 15 W. The i5-L16G7 uses less than half the power of the i7-5550U while delivering higher benchmark scores.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The i7-5550U supports dual-channel DDR3 with 29.9 GB/s bandwidth. The i5-L16G7 supports single-channel LPDDR4X with 17.1 GB/s. The i7-5550U has higher memory bandwidth despite using older DDR3 technology.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the i5-L16G7 and the i7-5550U have multiplier unlocked set to false, meaning neither can be overclocked through multiplier adjustment.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-L16G7 | Intel Core i7-5550U |

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

| Cores | 5 | 2 |

| Threads | 5 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 7 W | 15 W |

| Socket | None listed | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Lakefield | Broadwell |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 4,050 million | 1,900 million |

| Die Size | 82 mm² | 133 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB (per core) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR4X | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 17.1 GB/s | 29.9 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 6 Lanes | Gen 2, 12 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 64EU | Intel HD 6000 |

| Release Date | Not listed | 2015-02-28 |

| Launch MSRP | $281 | $426 |

| Part Number | SRH4U, SRJGA | SR26A |

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i5-L16G7 as the superior processor for compute workloads. It wins every benchmark by roughly 18%, uses less than half the power (7 W versus 15 W), and does so with a smaller die and newer process node. The i5-L16G7's 5 cores and 5 threads give it a structural advantage over the i7-5550U's 2 cores and 4 threads, and its single-core performance is also better despite matching boost clocks. For anyone choosing between these two for multi-threaded rendering, encoding, or general productivity, the i5-L16G7 is the clear pick.

The i7-5550U is not without merit. Its dual-channel memory support delivers 29.9 GB/s of bandwidth versus 17.1 GB/s, which could benefit memory-heavy applications. It also has a higher base clock of 2.00 GHz, which might provide more consistent performance in short, lightly threaded bursts. However, these advantages do not show up in any Cinebench test, where the i5-L16G7 dominates across the board. The i7-5550U's launch MSRP was $426, significantly higher than the i5-L16G7's $281, yet it delivers lower benchmark scores.

The aggregate scores tell the real story: 816 versus 813. These chips are nearly identical in overall performance, with the i5-L16G7 holding a razor-thin 0.4% edge. The i7-5550U's rival list includes the AMD A10-6800K, which it beats by 0.5%, while the i5-L16G7's rivals include the same Xeon parts. Both sit at the 22nd percentile, meaning they are entry-level performers by modern standards. The i5-L16G7 is the better engineering achievement — more cores, lower power, newer node — and the benchmarks confirm it. The i7-5550U is the older, more power-hungry design that cannot keep up despite its higher base clock and dual-channel memory. For a builder choosing between these two, the i5-L16G7 is the only rational pick based on performance data.