Intel Core i7-950 vs Intel Pentium Gold G5400T Comparison
Intel Core i7-950
Pentium Gold G5400T
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core i7-950 vs Intel Pentium Gold G5400T
The Verdict
The recorded data shows a remarkably close contest between two processors from very different eras. The Intel Core i7-950, a 2009 45 nm Nehalem part, wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Pentium Gold G5400T, a 2018 14 nm Coffee Lake chip. However, the margins are consistently slim, ranging from 2.5% to 3% across Cinebench workloads.
The Core i7-950 takes the performance crown in every measured test, but the Pentium Gold G5400T counters with a dramatically lower 35 W TDP compared to the i7-950's 130 W TDP, plus integrated graphics and ECC memory support. For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded rendering scores, the i7-950 is the clear choice. For those building a low-power system where the 35 W envelope and integrated UHD Graphics 610 eliminate the need for a separate GPU, the G5400T is the sensible pick. The data does not support calling either a dominant winner; the G5400T loses by small margins but offers platform efficiencies the i7-950 cannot match.
Architecture Differences
The two CPUs represent opposite ends of Intel's design philosophy over a decade apart. The Core i7-950 uses the Nehalem architecture (codename Bloomfield) built on a 45 nm process at Intel's own foundry, packing 731 million transistors into a 263 mm² die. It offers 4 cores and 8 threads with a base clock of 3.07 GHz and a boost clock of 3.33 GHz. Its cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache.
The Pentium Gold G5400T is a Coffee Lake part on a 14 nm process, with a die size of 126 mm² (transistor count not recorded). It provides 2 cores and 4 threads at a fixed 3.10 GHz base clock with no boost capability. Its cache structure is smaller: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. This gives the i7-950 double the physical cores, double the threads, and double the L3 cache, though the G5400T's newer process allows for a much smaller die and far lower power draw.
Memory support differs significantly. The i7-950 uses DDR3 memory over a triple-channel bus, while the G5400T uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The G5400T also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i7-950. PCIe generations differ as well: the i7-950 offers Gen 2, while the G5400T provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The G5400T includes integrated UHD Graphics 610; the i7-950 has no integrated graphics recorded. Both are end-of-life desktop parts with locked multipliers, but the G5400T has a recorded launch MSRP of $64 while the i7-950 has no launch price listed.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The benchmark suite covers five Cinebench tests, and the Core i7-950 wins every single one, but never by a large margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-950 scores 280 against the G5400T's 272, a 2.9% advantage. The identical 2.9% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i7-950 posts 1167 versus 1134.
Single-core results are similarly tight. Cinebench R20 singlecore shows the i7-950 at 164 and the G5400T at 160, a 2.5% lead. Cinebench R23 singlecore gives the i7-950 392 points versus 381 for the G5400T, a 2.9% gap. The largest relative win for the i7-950 comes in Cinebench R23 multicore, where it scores 2780 against 2700, a 3% advantage.
The G5400T does have one additional benchmark recorded that the i7-950 lacks: Geekbench multicore at 1331 and singlecore at 646. These scores cannot be directly compared since no corresponding i7-950 Geekbench data exists in the database. Across the five shared tests, the i7-950's wins are consistent but modest. The average benchmark score puts the i7-950 at 957 and the G5400T at 946, a difference that places them in nearly the same performance tier. The i7-950 sits at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, while the G5400T sits at the 25th, effectively adjacent in overall standing.
FAQ
Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Core i7-950 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Pentium Gold G5400T has 2 cores and 4 threads.
Q: Does the Pentium Gold G5400T have integrated graphics?
A: Yes, the G5400T includes integrated UHD Graphics 610. The Core i7-950 has no integrated graphics recorded in the database.
Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?
A: The Core i7-950 has a 130 W TDP, while the Pentium Gold G5400T has a 35 W TDP, a substantial difference favoring the newer part.
Q: Which CPU wins in single-core performance?
A: The Core i7-950 wins in single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 singlecore, it scores 164 versus 160 for the G5400T, and in Cinebench R23 singlecore, it scores 392 versus 381.
Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?
A: No. The Pentium Gold G5400T supports ECC memory, while the Core i7-950 does not.
Q: What is the memory channel configuration for each?
A: The Core i7-950 uses triple-channel DDR3 memory, while the Pentium Gold G5400T uses dual-channel DDR4 with a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s.
Where Each One Wins
The Core i7-950 wins all five recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests, making it the outright performance leader in CPU-bound rendering workloads. Its advantages stem from having 4 cores and 8 threads against the G5400T's 2 cores and 4 threads, plus a larger 8 MB L3 cache versus 4 MB. The i7-950 also holds a slight edge in clock speed when boosted: 3.33 GHz boost versus the G5400T's fixed 3.10 GHz. This combination allows it to outperform the G5400T in every shared benchmark, though the margins are small enough (2.5% to 3%) that the difference may not be perceptible in everyday use.
The Pentium Gold G5400T wins in platform-level efficiency and integration, even though it loses every raw performance test. Its 35 W TDP is dramatically lower than the i7-950's 130 W, making it suitable for compact, low-power builds where heat and electricity draw matter more than peak throughput. The inclusion of UHD Graphics 610 means a separate graphics card is unnecessary for basic display output, something the i7-950 cannot offer. The G5400T also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i7-950, which may appeal to users running memory-sensitive applications. Its dual-channel DDR4 support with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth and PCIe Gen 3 connectivity provide a more modern platform foundation despite fewer cores.
For users who need maximum multi-threaded rendering performance from these two specific options, the i7-950 is the only choice: it wins all five Cinebench tests and posts a higher average benchmark score of 957 versus 946. For users who want a low-power, integrated-graphics desktop with ECC support and modern memory, the G5400T is the better fit, accepting a small performance deficit in exchange for efficiency and features. The data shows no scenario where the G5400T outperforms the i7-950 in compute benchmarks, but its platform advantages make it the better option for specific, efficiency-focused use cases.