Intel Core i7-2675QM vs Intel Core i7-5600U Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2675QM and Intel Core i7-5600U represent two distinct approaches to mobile computing within the same product family, separated by nearly four years of architectural evolution. The 2675QM is a quad-core Sandy Bridge part designed for maximum throughput in larger laptops, while the 5600U is a dual-core Broadwell-U chip engineered for ultraportables, prioritizing efficiency and single-thread responsiveness. Benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: the older quad-core wins most multi-threaded and even single-threaded Cinebench tests, yet the newer dual-core dominates Geekbench, particularly in single-core performance. This page analyzes their benchmark results, architectural differences, and specification gaps to clarify which processor excels in which workload.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2675QM is the clear winner in rendering and sustained multi-threaded workloads. Across the Cinebench suite, it wins all five tests, with margins ranging from 22.7% to 23.1% over the 5600U. This is a direct consequence of its 4-core/8-thread configuration versus the 5600U's 2-core/4-thread setup. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 2675QM scores 3118 against the 5600U's 2537, a 22.9% advantage. Even in Cinebench R20 single-core, the 2675QM leads with 184 points versus 150, a 22.7% gap, suggesting its higher boost clock and older architecture still deliver competitive single-thread performance in this specific benchmark.

The Intel Core i7-5600U wins decisively in Geekbench, a benchmark suite that heavily favors its newer Broadwell architecture and higher clock speeds. In Geekbench multi-core, the 5600U scores 1750 versus the 2675QM's 1301, a 25.7% advantage. The single-core gap is even more pronounced: 917 versus 415, a 54.7% lead. This indicates the 5600U's per-core efficiency, enabled by the 14nm process and architectural improvements, allows it to execute legacy and integer-heavy workloads far faster than the older Sandy Bridge design. For everyday tasks like web browsing, office productivity, and light photo editing, the 5600U would feel noticeably snappier.

The overall win count favors the 2675QM at 5 wins to 2, but the nature of the wins matters. The 2675QM's victories are clustered in Cinebench, which scales with core count and is sensitive to sustained power delivery. The 5600U's victories in Geekbench, especially the massive single-core margin, suggest that for latency-sensitive, lightly-threaded applications, the newer part is superior. The data indicates a clear use-case split: choose the 2675QM for content creation, video encoding, or any workload that can utilize eight threads; choose the 5600U for general responsiveness and single-threaded performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras of Intel's mobile roadmap. The i7-2675QM is built on the Sandy Bridge architecture using a 32 nm process node. It houses 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i7-5600U is based on Broadwell (codename Broadwell-U), fabricated on a 14 nm node, packing 1,300 million transistors into a much smaller 82 mm² die. This node shrink is the fundamental enabler of the 5600U's efficiency: it delivers a 15W TDP versus the 2675QM's 45W TDP, while still achieving higher clock speeds.

Cache configurations also differ significantly. Both share the same per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) cache sizes, but the 2675QM has a larger 6 MB shared L3 cache, while the 5600U has a smaller 4 MB shared L3 cache. The 2675QM's larger L3 is beneficial for multi-threaded workloads where multiple cores need to share data, while the 5600U's smaller cache is compensated by its higher clock speeds and architectural improvements.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 2675QM pairs with Intel HD 3000, while the 5600U features Intel HD 5500. The latter is a significantly more modern GPU with better media capabilities and driver support, though benchmark data for graphics is not included in this analysis. The 5600U also supports DDR3 memory and lists a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, whereas the 2675QM's memory support field is not provided in the data. Both use dual-channel memory buses. Finally, the 5600U has a Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only) PCIe configuration, while the 2675QM's PCIe information is not listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are uniform in their verdict. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 2675QM scores 314 against the 5600U's 255, a 23.1% advantage. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1309 vs 1065, 22.9%) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (3118 vs 2537, 22.9%). The consistency of these margins suggests a stable performance ratio under sustained load, likely reflecting the 2675QM's two extra physical cores.

More surprising are the single-core Cinebench results. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the 2675QM wins with 184 versus 150, a 22.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 440 versus 358, a 22.9% gap. This is counterintuitive given the 5600U's higher base clock (2.60 GHz vs 2.20 GHz) and boost clock (3.20 GHz vs 3.10 GHz). The data suggests the Sandy Bridge architecture has a stronger implementation for this specific rendering workload, or the 5600U's power management limits its sustained single-core boost in this test.

Geekbench tells the opposite story. In Geekbench multi-core, the 5600U wins 1750 to 1301, a 25.7% margin in its favor. The single-core result is dramatic: the 5600U scores 917 versus 415, a 54.7% advantage. This massive delta indicates the Broadwell architecture offers a substantial IPC (instructions per clock) uplift over Sandy Bridge, especially in integer and memory-latency-sensitive operations that Geekbench emphasizes. The 5600U's higher base clock (2.60 GHz vs 2.20 GHz) further amplifies this advantage.

The data presents a paradox: the 2675QM wins all Cinebench tests, including single-core, but loses Geekbench by a wide margin. This highlights that different benchmarks stress different parts of a CPU. Cinebench is heavily dependent on raw compute and core scaling, while Geekbench's mixed workload suite benefits more from architectural efficiency and memory subsystem improvements found in Broadwell.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors, based solely on the FACT PACK data:

| Specification | Intel Core i7-2675QM | Intel Core i7-5600U |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.10 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1224 | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Broadwell |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 14 nm |

| Transistors | 1,160 million | 1,300 million |

| Die Size | 216 mm² | 82 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | Not specified | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 25.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 2, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 3000 | Intel HD 5500 |

| Release Date | 2011-10-11 | 2015-02-28 |

| Part Number | SR02S | SR23V |

The i7-5600U has a launch MSRP of $393; the 2675QM's launch MSRP is not provided. Both processors are end-of-life, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are mobile segments with dual-channel memory buses and ECC disabled.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded rendering?

A: The Intel Core i7-2675QM wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3118 versus the i7-5600U's 2537, a 22.9% advantage. This is consistent with its 4-core/8-thread configuration versus the 5600U's 2-core/4-thread setup.

Q: Why does the i7-5600U win in Geekbench despite having fewer cores?

A: The i7-5600U's Broadwell architecture on a 14nm process offers higher per-core efficiency. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 917 versus the 2675QM's 415, a 54.7% lead. Its higher base clock (2.60 GHz vs 2.20 GHz) and boost clock (3.20 GHz vs 3.10 GHz) also contribute.

Q: Does the i7-2675QM win any single-threaded benchmarks?

A: Yes. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the 2675QM scores 184 versus 150, a 22.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 440 versus 358, a 22.9% lead. This contrasts sharply with its Geekbench single-core loss.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The i7-2675QM has a TDP of 45W, while the i7-5600U has a TDP of 15W. This 30W difference is a direct result of the process node shrink from 32nm to 14nm and the reduced core count.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The i7-2675QM has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-5600U has 4 MB. Both share 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core.

Q: How do their integrated graphics compare?

A: The i7-2675QM features Intel HD 3000, while the i7-5600U features Intel HD 5500. The HD 5500 is from a newer generation, but no graphics benchmark data is available in this comparison.