CPU Comparison

The Intel Processor N150 and the Intel Core i7-975 occupy two starkly different eras of Intel’s design philosophy, and the benchmark data reflects a clear generational split. The N150 wins the majority of the head-to-head comparisons, including a dominant victory in single-core performance, while the i7-975 counters with a win in one multi-core workload. Both CPUs land at the 28th percentile among all CPUs, with nearly identical average benchmark scores (1025 for the N150, 1023 for the i7-975), placing them in the same performance tier overall despite their architectural chasm.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in this matchup is in the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where the Intel Processor N150 delivers a score of 935 against the i7-975’s 419. That is a delta of 123.2% in favor of the N150, meaning it more than doubles the older chip’s single-threaded output. This is a massive generational leap, reflecting the N150’s modern Twin Lake architecture and its ability to execute instructions far more efficiently than the 2009-era Bloomfield design. In single-threaded workloads, which still dominate everyday responsiveness, web browsing, and lightly threaded applications, the N150 is unequivocally the stronger processor.

The multi-core results paint a more nuanced picture. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N150 scores 422.5 versus the i7-975’s 299, a 41.3% advantage for the newer chip. This is notable because the i7-975 has eight threads (four cores with Hyper-Threading) while the N150 has only four threads (four physical cores, no SMT). Despite the i7-975’s thread-count advantage, the N150’s superior per-core efficiency and higher sustained throughput per watt allow it to win this older benchmark convincingly. However, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the tables turn: the i7-975 scores 2974 against the N150’s 2590.5, a 12.9% margin for the older chip. This suggests that as the workload becomes more demanding and scales across threads, the i7-975’s eight threads begin to overcome the N150’s per-core advantage.

The overall win tally stands at 2–1 in favor of the N150, but the magnitude of the single-core victory (123.2%) dwarfs the i7-975’s multi-core lead (12.9%). When weighted by performance deltas, the N150 is the clear winner in this head-to-head. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: the N150 sits at 1025 with a 0.1% delta over the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T, while the i7-975 sits at 1023 with a 0% delta against the same rival. Both are effectively tied in aggregate, but the N150 achieves that parity with a fraction of the power draw and a much newer process node.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Processor N150 wins decisively. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 935 versus the i7-975’s 419, a 123.2% advantage. This is the largest delta in any benchmark between the two.

Q: Does the older i7-975 beat the N150 in any test?

A: Yes, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-975 scores 2974 against the N150’s 2590.5, a 12.9% lead. This is the only head-to-head test where the i7-975 comes out ahead.

Q: How do their overall benchmark percentiles compare?

A: Both CPUs sit at exactly the 28th percentile among all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are also nearly identical: 1025 for the N150 and 1023 for the i7-975.

Q: What are their thread counts, and does it matter?

A: The N150 has 4 threads (4 cores), while the i7-975 has 8 threads (4 cores with Hyper-Threading). The i7-975’s extra threads help it win the R23 multi-core test, but the N150’s efficiency wins R15 multi-core despite having half the threads.

Q: Which CPU has a higher TDP?

A: The i7-975 has a TDP of 130W, while the N150 has a TDP of just 6W. This is a massive difference, with the N150 drawing roughly 4% of the i7-975’s power budget.

Q: Are these CPUs from the same generation?

A: No. The N150 is from the Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N) generation, released in November 2024, while the i7-975 is from the Core i7 Extreme (Bloomfield) generation, released in June 2009.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two processors is vast, spanning 15 years of Intel’s design evolution. The N150 is built on the Twin Lake architecture, fabricated on a 10 nm process node, while the i7-975 uses the Nehalem architecture on a 45 nm process. This process shrink is the primary driver of the N150’s efficiency: it delivers comparable or better performance in most tests while consuming 6W versus the i7-975’s 130W TDP.

The N150’s cache layout is modern and shared: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i7-975 uses an older per-core design: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The i7-975 has a larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB), which partially explains its stronger showing in the R23 multi-core test, where larger caches can help with data reuse across threads.

Memory support also diverges sharply. The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The i7-975 supports only DDR3 over a triple-channel bus, delivering 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite the i7-975’s triple-channel advantage, the N150’s newer memory types provide higher raw bandwidth. The N150 also features integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), while the i7-975 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output.

The N150’s PCIe implementation is Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-975 uses Gen 2. The i7-975 is unlocked for overclocking and has a transistor count of 731 million on a 263 mm² die, whereas the N150’s transistor count and die size are not specified. The production statuses also differ: the N150 is Active, while the i7-975 is End-of-life.

Specification Differences

The most glaring specification difference is TDP: the N150 draws 6W, the i7-975 draws 130W. This is a 124W gap that fundamentally changes the use case, the N150 is passively coolable and suited for low-power mobile devices, while the i7-975 requires substantial cooling and power delivery.

Clock speeds differ in base frequency: the N150 has a base clock of 0.10 GHz, which is exceptionally low, but boosts to 3.60 GHz. The i7-975 has a base clock of 3.33 GHz and boosts to 3.60 GHz. Both reach the same boost clock, but the N150’s base is drastically lower, indicating aggressive power management that ramps up under load.

Memory support is another key split: the N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel bus, while the i7-975 supports only DDR3 over a triple-channel bus. The N150’s memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s versus the i7-975’s 25.6 GB/s. The N150 has 4 threads, the i7-975 has 8 threads. The N150 has integrated UHD Graphics 730; the i7-975 has none. The N150 uses Intel BGA 1264, the i7-975 uses Intel Socket 1366. The N150 is a Mobile segment part; the i7-975 is a Desktop segment part. The i7-975 has an unlocked multiplier; the N150 does not. The i7-975 has a launch MSRP of $1059; the N150 has no listed launch MSRP. The i7-975’s process node is 45 nm; the N150’s is 10 nm.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Processor N150 wins in scenarios that favor efficiency, modern instruction sets, and single-threaded responsiveness. Its 123.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core makes it the obvious choice for everyday tasks like web browsing, office productivity, and light media consumption. Its 41.3% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core further cements its advantage in older multi-threaded workloads. The N150’s 6W TDP and integrated UHD Graphics 730 make it suitable for fanless or low-power mobile designs, embedded systems, and compact laptops where battery life and thermal management are paramount. Its support for DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory provides flexibility in system design.

The Intel Core i7-975 wins in one specific area: sustained multi-threaded rendering on modern benchmarks. Its 12.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core indicates that when a workload is heavily threaded and scales well beyond four threads, the i7-975’s eight threads can outperform the N150’s four. This makes the i7-975 the better choice for legacy multi-threaded applications that are not latency-sensitive and can fully utilize eight threads. Its unlocked multiplier also allows overclocking, which could extend its multi-core lead further in the hands of an enthusiast. However, this comes at the cost of a 130W TDP and no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU and robust cooling.

The Verdict

The data-driven verdict is clear: the Intel Processor N150 is the better processor for the vast majority of users and workloads. It wins two of three head-to-head benchmarks, including the single-core test by a 123.2% margin, and it matches the i7-975’s overall performance percentile (28th) while drawing just 6W versus 130W. The N150’s modern 10 nm process, integrated graphics, and support for current memory standards make it a far more practical choice for any modern system.

The Intel Core i7-975 retains a narrow niche: applications that are heavily multi-threaded and can leverage its eight threads, as demonstrated by its 12.9% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core. For users running such workloads on a desktop with a dedicated GPU and ample cooling, the i7-975 can still deliver competitive multi-threaded throughput. However, given its End-of-life status, 45 nm process, and triple-channel DDR3-only memory support, its relevance is limited to legacy systems or specific multi-threaded use cases.

For anyone building a new system or upgrading from an older platform, the N150 is the rational choice. It offers superior single-core performance, competitive multi-core performance in most tests, dramatically lower power consumption, and modern connectivity. The i7-975 is a historical artifact that, while still capable in one specific benchmark, cannot match the N150’s overall balance of efficiency and performance. The benchmark data overwhelmingly favors the N150 as the more capable and future-proof processor.