Intel Core i5-L16G7 vs Intel Core i7-920 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 scores 2793 versus 2442 for the Intel Core i7-920, a 12.6% advantage for the i5-L16G7.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core performance?

A: The i5-L16G7 wins every recorded single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core it scores 394 versus 344 for the i7-920, and in R20 single-core it leads 165 to 144, a 12.7% gap in both cases.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between these two processors?

A: The i5-L16G7 packs 4,050 million transistors on an 82 mm² die, while the i7-920 has 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The i5-L16G7 uses a 10 nm process versus 45 nm for the i7-920.

Q: Which chip has more physical cores?

A: The i5-L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads, while the i7-920 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The i7-920 relies on Hyper-Threading to reach 8 threads, whereas the i5-L16G7 has no extra threads per core.

Q: What is the rated power draw difference?

A: The i7-920 has a TDP of 130 watts, compared to just 7 watts for the i5-L16G7. This is a massive difference in thermal design power.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the i7-920 and the i5-L16G7 lack ECC memory support according to the database records.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i7-920 belongs to the Nehalem generation, codenamed Bloomfield, built on a 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. It uses the Intel Socket 1366 platform and is classified as a desktop part. The Core i5-L16G7, by contrast, is a Lakefield architecture chip, also from Intel but fabricated on a 10 nm node with 4,050 million transistors squeezed into an 82 mm² die. This is a mobile segment processor.

The core and thread configurations differ substantially. The i7-920 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning each core can handle two threads simultaneously. The i5-L16G7 offers 5 cores but only 5 threads, so no simultaneous multithreading is present. The cache hierarchy also diverges: the i7-920 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The i5-L16G7 has 80 KB L1 total, 512 KB L2 total, and 4 MB of shared L3. The L3 capacity is halved on the newer chip, yet performance still favors it in the benchmarks.

Memory support differs as well. The i7-920 uses DDR3 with a triple-channel memory bus, while the i5-L16G7 uses LPDDR4X with a single-channel configuration and a recorded memory bandwidth of 17.1 GB/s. The i7-920 has no integrated graphics, while the i5-L16G7 includes UHD Graphics with 64 execution units. PCIe generations also differ: the i7-920 supports PCIe Gen 2, and the i5-L16G7 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 6 lanes for the CPU.

The i7-920 has a base clock of 2.67 GHz and a boost clock of 2.93 GHz. The i5-L16G7 has a base clock listed as 1400.00 MHz (1.40 GHz) and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. Despite the lower base frequency, the newer chip boosts higher and wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. The i7-920 was released in November 2008 and is marked end-of-life, while the i5-L16G7 has no recorded release date but is also end-of-life. The i7-920 carries the part numbers SLBCHSLBEJ, and the i5-L16G7 carries SRH4U,SRJGA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent: the Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins all five recorded Cinebench tests, with margins clustered tightly between 12.5% and 12.7%. There is no single test where the i7-920 comes out ahead.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-L16G7 scores 281 versus 246 for the i7-920, a 12.5% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 1173 for the i5-L16G7 against 1025 for the i7-920, a 12.6% advantage. R23 multi-core follows with 2793 versus 2442, again a 12.6% difference. The single-core tests are even more decisive in percentage terms. Cinebench R20 single-core gives the i5-L16G7 a score of 165 versus 144 for the i7-920, a 12.7% margin. R23 single-core repeats that exact 12.7% gap, with scores of 394 and 344.

These margins are small enough to suggest that the i5-L16G7 is not dramatically faster in raw compute, but the consistency across all tests is notable. The i7-920, despite having more threads and a larger L3 cache, cannot overcome the architectural efficiency of the Lakefield chip. The i5-L16G7 also benefits from a higher boost clock of 3.00 GHz versus 2.93 GHz, though the base clocks tell a different story.

The average benchmark scores in the database place the i7-920 at 840 and the i5-L16G7 at 816, which is interesting: the i7-920 actually has a slightly higher average score across its recorded benchmarks, even though the head-to-head Cinebench tests all favor the i5-L16G7. This suggests the benchmark sample sets differ, and the i7-920 may have additional tests that skew its average upward. In terms of percentile ranking against all CPUs, both processors sit at the 22nd percentile, meaning they perform similarly relative to the entire database.

The nearest rivals for the i7-920 include the Intel Xeon X5470 with an average score of 839 (0.1% difference), the Intel Core i5-3380M at 838 (0.2%), the Intel Core i5-5200U at 838 (0.3%), and the AMD FX-8800P at 843 (-0.3%). For the i5-L16G7, the nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon X3440 at 815 (0.1%), the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 at 813 (0.4%), the Intel Core i7-5550U at 813 (0.4%), and the Intel Xeon E5540 at 820 (-0.5%). Both chips sit in a crowded performance band where many older and newer processors land within a few points of each other.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner in raw benchmark performance: the Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins every recorded Cinebench test, with margins from 12.5% to 12.7%. It achieves this despite having fewer threads, half the L3 cache, and a dramatically lower TDP of 7 watts versus 130 watts for the i7-920. The i5-L16G7 also carries a launch MSRP of $281, though the i7-920 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

For desktop users with an older Socket 1366 platform, the i7-920 remains a functional quad-core with 8 threads, but the benchmark results show it trails the newer mobile chip in every measured workload. The i7-920's triple-channel DDR3 memory bus and larger L3 cache do not translate into a performance advantage in these Cinebench tests. Its 22nd percentile ranking matches the i5-L16G7, so neither chip stands out in the broader CPU landscape.

The i5-L16G7, despite being a mobile part with a single-channel memory bus and only 5 threads, outperforms the older desktop processor consistently. This indicates that architectural improvements, specifically the 10 nm process and higher boost clock, more than compensate for reductions in cache and memory bandwidth. The i7-920's strengths, such as its 8 threads and larger shared L3, appear to be neutralized by the newer chip's efficiency.

The verdict from the recorded data is that the i5-L16G7 is the superior performer in Cinebench workloads. However, the i7-920 is not obsolete in a broader sense: its average benchmark score of 840 is slightly higher than the i5-L16G7's 816, suggesting that in other tests the older chip may hold its own or even lead. The 22nd percentile for both CPUs underscores that neither is a high-end part by current standards.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-920 | Intel Core i5-L16G7 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 5 |

| Threads | 8 | 5 |

| Base Clock | 2.67 GHz | 1400.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.93 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 130 W | 7 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1366 | None listed |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Lakefield |

| Codename | Bloomfield | Lakefield |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 731 million | 4,050 million |

| Die Size | 263 mm² | 82 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | LPDDR4X |

| Memory Bus | Triple-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 17.1 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 3, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | November 2008 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SLBCHSLBEJ | SRH4U,SRJGA |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database. It leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core by 12.5%, R20 multi-core by 12.6%, R23 multi-core by 12.6%, R20 single-core by 12.7%, and R23 single-core by 12.7%. The consistency of these margins suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk. The i5-L16G7 also wins on power efficiency, with a 7-watt TDP compared to the i7-920's 130 watts, making it the clear choice for thermally constrained or battery-powered environments. Its integrated UHD Graphics with 64 execution units provides a GPU capability that the i7-920 entirely lacks, which matters for systems requiring video output without a discrete card.

The Intel Core i7-920 has no benchmark wins in the recorded head-to-head data. However, it does hold specification advantages that could matter in certain contexts. It offers 8 threads versus 5, which may benefit heavily multithreaded workloads that scale well beyond the core count, though the Cinebench results do not show this advantage materializing. The i7-920 also has a larger 8 MB shared L3 cache, double the i5-L16G7's 4 MB, which could help in data-intensive applications with high cache reuse. The triple-channel DDR3 memory bus provides more memory channels than the single-channel LPDDR4X setup, potentially offering higher memory throughput in bandwidth-sensitive tasks, though the database records no memory bandwidth figure for the i7-920 to confirm this.

The i7-920's higher base clock of 2.67 GHz versus 1.40 GHz for the i5-L16G7 means that in short, lightly threaded bursts at base frequency, the older chip starts with a raw clock advantage. But the i5-L16G7 boosts to 3.00 GHz, which is higher than the i7-920's 2.93 GHz boost, and the single-core benchmark results favor the newer chip decisively. The i7-920's desktop socket (Intel Socket 1366) allows for upgrade paths and standard desktop cooling solutions, while the i5-L16G7 has no listed socket, indicating it may be soldered or BGA-mounted. For users with an existing LGA 1366 motherboard, the i7-920 is the only one of the two that could be installed in that platform.

In practical terms, the i5-L16G7 wins on every measured performance metric and offers integrated graphics and vastly lower power consumption. The i7-920's remaining advantages are structural: more threads, more L3 cache, and a multi-channel memory bus. These features do not translate into Cinebench victories, but they could matter for specific legacy applications or workloads that the benchmarks do not cover. The database's average benchmark scores show the i7-920 at 840 and the i5-L16G7 at 816, which hints that outside the Cinebench suite, the older part may be competitive or even superior in some tests. For a user prioritizing the recorded benchmark results, the choice is unambiguous: the i5-L16G7 is the faster processor. For a user on an existing Socket 1366 platform with a need for 8 threads and a larger cache pool, the i7-920 remains a viable, if older, option.