Intel Core i5-670

The Intel Core i5-670 is a dual-core, four-thread desktop processor from the Westmere generation, built on a 32 nm process with a Clarkdale codename. It operates at a base clock of 3.47 GHz and a boost clock of 3.73 GHz, with a 73 W TDP. Its benchmark profile places it at the 19th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 747, indicating a part that sits firmly in the entry-level segment of modern workloads. The data reveals a processor that relies heavily on its relatively high clock speeds to compensate for its modest core count, a trait that becomes immediately apparent when separating single-threaded from multi-threaded performance.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The performance split between single-threaded and multi-threaded benchmarks is stark. In Cinebench R23, the i5-670 scores 306 points in single-core and 2170 points in multi-core. The ratio here is roughly 7:1, meaning the multi-core score is about seven times the single-core score, which aligns perfectly with a 2-core/4-thread design where hyper-threading provides a partial boost. This indicates that the processor is far more competitive in lightly threaded tasks where its high 3.73 GHz boost clock can shine, than in heavily threaded workloads where it is limited by physical core count.

For real workloads, this split means the i5-670 is best suited for applications that rely on one or two threads. Office productivity, web browsing, and legacy software that cannot utilize multiple cores will see performance closer to its single-core capability. Conversely, modern content creation tasks, video encoding, or 3D rendering that scale across many cores will leave the processor at a significant disadvantage. The Cinebench R20 results echo this: a single-core score of 128 versus a multi-core score of 911, reinforcing the idea that the chip’s architecture favors responsiveness over throughput. The data suggests that users should not expect this processor to handle parallel workloads gracefully, as its 4 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel DDR3 memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s become bottlenecks when all threads are active.

How It Compares

The nearest rival data places the i5-670 in a tight cluster of low-end processors, all scoring within a fraction of a percent of each other. The Intel Pentium G4400 is the direct match, with an identical average score of 747 and a deltaPct of 0. This means the two chips perform indistinguishably in aggregate benchmarks, despite architectural differences. The Pentium G4400 is a newer design, but the i5-670’s higher clock speeds compensate for its older architecture, resulting in a statistical tie.

The Intel Atom x7211E is a near-identical rival, scoring 747 with a deltaPct of 0.1. This is a negligible difference, effectively making the two processors equivalent in overall performance. The Atom is a low-power part, but in this benchmark average, the i5-670 does not outpace it, which highlights how far low-power architectures have come. The Intel Celeron G4920 is the only rival with a negative deltaPct of -0.1, scoring 748. This means the Celeron is actually 0.1% faster, a margin so small that it falls within run-to-run variance. The AMD A10 PRO-7800B completes the group, scoring 746 with a deltaPct of 0.2, putting the i5-670 a mere 0.2% ahead of that AMD part.

These comparisons show a processor that has no distinct performance advantage over its closest competitors. The deltas are all under half a percent, which is statistically meaningless. The i5-670 is effectively locked in a four-way tie for the same performance tier, with no rival holding a meaningful edge.

Benchmark Performance

Looking at the Cinebench scores in isolation, the i5-670’s position becomes clearer. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2170. The nearest rival data does not provide individual test scores, only aggregate averages, so direct per-test comparisons are not possible. However, the aggregate deltaPct values tell the story. Against the AMD A10 PRO-7800B, the i5-670 is 0.2% ahead, which is less than 2 points on the average scale. Against the Intel Celeron G4920, it is 0.1% behind, a deficit of roughly 1 point. These are noise-level differences.

The single-core performance is more telling. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 306, when compared to the multi-core score of 2170, suggests that the chip’s single-thread efficiency is its primary asset. In the R20 test, the single-core score of 128 against a multi-core score of 911 shows a similar pattern. The data indicates that the i5-670 is not a processor that wins on raw throughput; instead, it maintains parity with its rivals through clock speed alone. The average benchmark score of 747 places it at the 19th percentile, meaning 81% of all CPUs tested perform better. That percentile is a stark indicator of its standing in the current market, where even budget parts have moved to quad-core or higher configurations.

The Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 218 is a legacy data point, but it follows the same trend. Across all three Cinebench versions, the multi-core scores are low in absolute terms, confirming that the 2-core/4-thread layout is the limiting factor. The 0.1% delta against the Atom x7211E is particularly notable, as that Atom is a low-power embedded chip, yet the i5-670 cannot outperform it in aggregate.

Who Should Consider It

Based on the benchmark data, the i5-670 is suitable for users whose workloads are dominated by single-threaded tasks. The high 3.73 GHz boost clock makes it acceptable for basic office applications, spreadsheet work, and web browsing, where the 306-point single-core R23 score indicates adequate responsiveness. For gaming, the processor would struggle with modern titles that utilize multiple cores, but older or less demanding games that rely on single-thread performance could run acceptably. The 19th percentile ranking suggests it is not a viable option for contemporary gaming at high settings.

For content creation, the multi-core scores are prohibitive. The 2170-point R23 multi-core score is far below what is needed for video editing or 3D rendering, and users attempting such workloads would experience long render times. The integrated Intel HD graphics provide basic display output but are not suitable for gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks. The processor is best suited for a secondary machine, a home server running light duties, or a retro gaming build where its dual-core performance is adequate.

The data does not support recommending this chip for any modern productivity workload that scales beyond two threads. Its 4 MB shared L3 cache is small by today’s standards, and the dual-channel DDR3 memory bus at 21.3 GB/s limits data throughput. Users who primarily run single-threaded legacy software may find it sufficient, but the near-identical scores of rival parts like the Pentium G4400 mean there is no reason to choose the i5-670 over a newer alternative.

Power and Thermals

The i5-670 has a TDP of 73 W, which places it in a moderate power class for its era. This TDP is high enough to require a dedicated cooling solution, but it is not extreme. A capable air cooler, such as a stock Intel cooler from the same generation, would be sufficient to manage thermals under load. The 32 nm process node helps keep heat generation in check, but the 73 W TDP means that passive cooling is not an option.

For a modern user, this TDP is relatively low compared to current high-end parts, but it is still higher than many low-power alternatives. The data does not include specific thermal measurements, but the TDP figure implies that the processor will not be difficult to cool in a standard desktop chassis. The fact that it is end-of-life means that replacement coolers that fit the Intel Socket 1156 are becoming scarce, but any cooler designed for that socket will handle the 73 W load without issue. The power draw is consistent with its performance tier, neither efficient nor wasteful for its time.

Platform and Compatibility

The i5-670 uses the Intel Socket 1156, a platform that is long obsolete. The processor supports DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported, which limits its use in server or workstation environments that require error correction. PCIe support is Gen 2 with 16 lanes available from the CPU, which is adequate for a single graphics card but does not support the bandwidth of modern Gen 4 or Gen 5 devices.

The integrated graphics are listed as Intel HD, providing basic video output for office use but no gaming capability. As an end-of-life product with a launch date of January 6, 2010, the upgrade path is severely limited. Users on this platform are stuck with the Socket 1156 ecosystem, which offers no modern CPU upgrades beyond the few Westmere and Nehalem parts that were released for it. The launch MSRP was $284, a figure that reflects its original positioning as a mid-range part, but current market availability is limited to used or refurbished units. The multiplier is locked, preventing overclocking, and the part number is SLBLT. For a new build, this platform is not recommended, as the benchmark data shows no performance advantage over cheaper, newer alternatives, and the lack of modern features like PCIe Gen 4 or DDR4 support makes it a poor foundation for any future upgrades.