CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i7-5650U and Intel Processor N150 are separated by nearly a decade of silicon evolution, yet the benchmark data reveals a more nuanced contest than the release dates might suggest. While the N150 wins all three head-to-head comparisons, the magnitude of those victories varies dramatically depending on the workload. The overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 1027 for the i7-5650U versus 1025 for the N150, placing both chips at the 28th percentile of all CPUs, but the distribution of performance tells the real story. The N150 is the clear performance leader in raw compute, but the i7-5650U’s advantages in platform features and its status as a former flagship part mean the choice is not purely about speed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided contest comes in single-threaded performance, where the Intel Processor N150 demolishes the Core i7-5650U. In the Cinebench R23 single-core test, the N150 scores 935 points against the i7-5650U’s 358 points, a staggering 61.7% advantage. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap in per-core efficiency. The N150’s boost clock of 3.60 GHz versus the i7-5650U’s 3.20 GHz contributes, but the architectural gains from Twin Lake over Broadwell are the dominant factor. For any workload that relies on a single thread, legacy applications, light web browsing, or responsiveness in everyday tasks, the N150 is in a different league.

The multi-core results paint a more complex picture. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N150 again wins decisively, scoring 422.5 versus the i7-5650U’s 256 points, a 39.4% margin. This test favors the N150’s four physical cores over the i7-5650U’s two cores with Hyper-Threading, and the older chip simply cannot compensate for the core count deficit. However, when the workload scales to the more demanding Cinebench R23 multi-core test, the gap collapses dramatically. Here the N150 scores 2590.5 against the i7-5650U’s 2542 points, a mere 1.9% difference. The thermal constraints of the N150’s 6-watt TDP likely limit sustained multi-core performance under prolonged load, allowing the 15-watt i7-5650U to keep pace despite its architectural age. This suggests that in short bursts, the N150 is far faster, but in extended rendering or encoding sessions, the two chips are effectively tied.

There is no benchmark in the data where the i7-5650U wins outright, but its competitive showing in Cinebench R23 multi-core highlights that it remains a capable processor for multi-threaded tasks. The Geekbench scores, where the i7-5650U posts 1854 multi-core and 960 single-core, are not directly compared in the head-to-head data, but they reinforce the pattern: the N150’s single-core dominance is its defining trait, while multi-core performance is closer than the core counts would suggest.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Processor N150 is the clear winner for single-threaded responsiveness and short-duration multi-core bursts. Its 61.7% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core makes it the obvious choice for everyday computing where applications frequently rely on one or two threads. The 39.4% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core also indicates that the N150 handles lightly threaded multi-core workloads, such as quick video encodes or batch image processing, with significantly more speed. Its four physical cores provide a raw core-count advantage that the i7-5650U cannot overcome in short, bursty tasks.

The Intel Core i7-5650U wins on sustained multi-core endurance, even if it does not win any benchmark outright. Its 1.9% deficit in Cinebench R23 multi-core is effectively a tie, and given the i7-5650U’s higher 15-watt TDP, it is likely better equipped to maintain that level of performance over extended periods without throttling. The i7-5650U also offers a more mature platform: it supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a 29.9 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the N150 is limited to single-channel DDR4, DDR5, or LPDDR5 with a higher 38.4 GB/s theoretical bandwidth. For memory-bandwidth-sensitive applications, the i7-5650U’s dual-channel configuration can be an advantage, even if the raw bandwidth number is lower.

For users who prioritize energy efficiency, the N150’s 6-watt TDP is a decisive factor. It delivers superior single-core performance and competitive multi-core throughput while consuming less than half the power of the i7-5650U. This makes the N150 the better fit for fanless designs, compact laptops, or any system where thermal management and battery life are paramount.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct design philosophies separated by two process nodes. The Intel Core i7-5650U is built on Intel’s 14 nm Broadwell architecture, a 2015-era design that was the first to bring the company’s 14 nm process to mobile. It packs 1,900 million transistors into a 133 mm² die and features a 4 MB shared L3 cache, with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The N150, by contrast, uses the 10 nm Twin Lake architecture, a derivative of the Alder Lake-N family, and features a larger 6 MB shared L3 cache with 96 KB of L1 per core and a shared 2 MB L2. The process shrink allows the N150 to achieve higher clock speeds, a 3.60 GHz boost versus the i7-5650U’s 3.20 GHz, while operating at a fraction of the TDP.

The core configurations are fundamentally different. The i7-5650U has two cores and four threads via Hyper-Threading, while the N150 has four physical cores and four threads with no simultaneous multithreading. This explains the N150’s advantage in multi-core tests that scale with physical cores, but it also means the i7-5650U can sometimes outperform in workloads that benefit from additional threads per core. The N150’s base clock of 0.10 GHz is extraordinarily low, indicating a design that aggressively downclocks to save power and relies on boost behavior to deliver performance on demand.

Memory support diverges significantly. The i7-5650U is limited to DDR3 in a dual-channel configuration, while the N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, albeit in single-channel mode. The N150’s 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is higher than the i7-5650U’s 29.9 GB/s, but the dual-channel advantage of the older chip can reduce latency in certain workloads. PCIe connectivity also differs: the i7-5650U offers Gen 2 with 12 lanes, while the N150 provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The N150’s newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the i7-5650U has more total lanes. Integrated graphics are also distinct, with the i7-5650U featuring Intel HD 6000 and the N150 using UHD Graphics 730.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-5650U has an average benchmark score of 1027, while the Intel Processor N150 scores 1025, a difference of only 0.2%.

Q: How much faster is the N150 in single-core performance?

A: In the Cinebench R23 single-core test, the N150 scores 935 versus the i7-5650U’s 358, representing a 61.7% advantage.

Q: Why is the multi-core gap so much smaller in Cinebench R23 than in Cinebench R15?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the N150 leads by only 1.9% (2590.5 vs 2542), compared to a 39.4% lead in Cinebench R15 (422.5 vs 256). The N150’s lower 6-watt TDP likely limits sustained performance under the longer R23 workload.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The i7-5650U supports DDR3 in dual-channel mode, while the N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 in single-channel mode.

Q: Are these processors similar in overall performance?

A: Yes, their average benchmark scores are nearly identical (1027 vs 1025), and both sit at the 28th percentile of all CPUs, with the N150’s nearest rival being the i7-5650U at a 0.2% delta.

Q: Which processor has the lower TDP?

A: The Intel Processor N150 has a TDP of 6 watts, compared to the Intel Core i7-5650U’s 15 watts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-5650U | Intel Processor N150 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 0.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 6 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1168 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Architecture | Broadwell | Twin Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 1,900 million | Not specified |

| Die Size | 133 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2, 12 Lanes | Gen 3, 9 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 6000 | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2015-02-28 | 2024-11-19 |

| Launch MSRP | $426 | Not specified |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split decision. For anyone prioritizing raw performance, especially in single-threaded tasks, the Intel Processor N150 is the unequivocal choice. Its 61.7% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 39.4% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core make it dramatically faster for everyday use, and its 6-watt TDP delivers that performance at a fraction of the power draw. The N150’s active production status and modern platform support for DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory ensure it is a forward-looking option for new designs.

The Intel Core i7-5650U, despite losing every head-to-head benchmark, is not without merit. Its near-tie in Cinebench R23 multi-core (within 1.9%) shows that sustained multi-threaded workloads are not a weakness, and its dual-channel memory configuration can be advantageous for bandwidth-sensitive applications. It also offers more PCIe lanes (12 vs 9), which may matter for systems with multiple expansion devices. However, its end-of-life status, 14 nm process, and DDR3-only memory support make it a legacy part best suited for existing systems or applications requiring specific platform features.

The final verdict hinges on workload and context. For new purchases or upgrades, the Intel Processor N150 is the data-backed winner, offering superior performance in most scenarios with dramatically lower power consumption. The i7-5650U remains a viable option for users who need dual-channel memory bandwidth or who are constrained by an existing BGA 1168 socket, but the benchmark data provides no compelling reason to choose it over the N150 for general compute tasks. The N150’s three head-to-head wins, including the decisive single-core victory, make it the recommended processor from a pure performance-per-watt standpoint.