Intel Core M-5Y71

The Intel Core M-5Y71 is a 2-core, 4-thread mobile processor from Intel’s Broadwell-Y family, fabricated on a 14 nm process. It carries a 5W TDP, integrates Intel HD 5300 graphics, and supports DDR4 memory. Benchmark data places it at the 12th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 583—a figure that effectively ties it with several older AMD desktop parts.

Benchmark Performance

The M-5Y71’s Cinebench results are consistently low across every test. In Cinebench R15, it scores 170 points in the multi-core test. In R20, the multi-core score is 711, while the single-core score is 100. In R23, the multi-core score reaches 1693, with a single-core score of 239. These absolute numbers are among the lowest in the benchmark database, confirming the chip’s position near the bottom of the performance spectrum. The average benchmark score of 583 places it in the 12th percentile, meaning it outperforms only 12% of all CPUs tracked.

The nearest rivals—all AMD parts—show how tightly grouped this performance tier is. The AMD Athlon II X3 460 has an identical average score of 583, with a delta of +0.1%, meaning the M-5Y71 is statistically tied with that triple-core desktop chip. The AMD Phenom II X4 805 and the AMD Athlon II X4 615e each score 585, putting the M-5Y71 0.3% behind both. The AMD A10-5757M scores 588, a 0.9% gap. None of these deltas exceed one percent, so the M-5Y71 delivers essentially the same aggregate performance as these older, higher-power desktop processors.

The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 711 is just over 7 times the single-core score of 100. The R23 ratio is nearly identical: 1693 divided by 239 equals 7.08. This 7x scaling is unusually high for a dual-core part with four threads, but it reflects the extremely low single-thread baseline. In absolute terms, the single-core scores are very weak, and the multi-core scores remain modest even after scaling. The chip’s boost clock of 2.90 GHz helps single-thread performance, but the base clock of 1.20 GHz and the 5W TDP constrain sustained throughput.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The split between single-thread and multi-thread performance reveals a processor that depends heavily on thread parallelism to achieve any meaningful throughput. With a Cinebench R20 single-core score of 100, the M-5Y71 is far below the scores of modern desktop and even mobile chips. The multi-core score of 711, however, is 7.11 times higher, indicating that the four threads are able to extract significant work from multi-threaded workloads. This pattern persists in R23, where the single-core score of 239 jumps to 1693 multi-core—a 7.08x ratio.

For real-world use, this means the M-5Y71 will be noticeably faster in applications that can use all four threads than in those limited to one or two cores. Tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and scientific simulations that are multi-threaded will see better utilization, but the absolute performance is still low enough that even these workloads will be slow compared to mainstream processors. Conversely, single-threaded applications—such as many web browsers, office suites, and older games—will expose the chip’s weakness, as the single-core scores are among the lowest recorded.

The boost clock of 2.90 GHz on a single core provides a temporary uplift, but the 1.20 GHz base clock suggests that sustained single-thread loads will drop to much lower frequencies under thermal or power constraints. The 5W TDP is a clear indicator that this processor is designed for extremely power-efficient, low-load environments rather than performance-critical tasks. The data shows a chip that can handle light, bursty work reasonably well but will throttle under sustained load.

How It Compares

AMD Athlon II X3 460: The M-5Y71 is 0.1% ahead of this triple-core desktop processor in average benchmark score. The delta is negligible; both parts deliver nearly identical aggregate performance, despite the M-5Y71 having fewer physical cores. The M-5Y71’s four threads compensate for the Athlon’s three cores, resulting in a statistical tie.

AMD Phenom II X4 805: The M-5Y71 trails the Phenom II X4 805 by 0.3%. The Phenom II is a quad-core desktop chip, but its average score of 585 is only 2 points higher than the M-5Y71’s 583. This indicates that the M-5Y71’s modern architecture and higher clock boost allow it to nearly match an older quad-core design.

AMD Athlon II X4 615e: The M-5Y71 is also 0.3% behind this energy-efficient quad-core AMD part. The Athlon II X4 615e scores 585, again just 2 points above the M-5Y71. The M-5Y71’s 14 nm process and 5W TDP contrast sharply with the Athlon’s older process and higher power envelope, yet the performance gap is minimal.

AMD A10-5757M: The M-5Y71 is 0.9% behind this mobile APU. The A10-5757M scores 588, a 5-point difference. This is the largest gap among the nearest rivals, but it remains under 1%. The M-5Y71’s integrated HD 5300 graphics and lower TDP may offer advantages in specific mobile use cases, but raw CPU performance is essentially equivalent.

FAQ

Q: What is the TDP of the Intel Core M-5Y71?

A: The TDP is 5W.

Q: What integrated graphics does the M-5Y71 include?

A: It includes Intel HD 5300.

Q: What is the process node used for this processor?

A: The process node is 14 nm, manufactured by Intel.

Q: How much L3 cache does the M-5Y71 have?

A: It has 4 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: When was the M-5Y71 released?

A: It was released on October 26, 2014.

Q: What is the average benchmark score of the M-5Y71?

A: The average benchmark score is 583.

Who Should Consider It

The Intel Core M-5Y71 is not a performance-oriented processor. Its 12th percentile ranking and low Cinebench scores—especially the single-core R20 result of 100—indicate that it will struggle with any demanding application. Users who run heavy multi-threaded workloads such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or large data compilation will find the chip severely limiting, even with its 4 threads and 7x multi-core scaling. The absolute multi-core scores (711 in R20, 1693 in R23) are far below what modern desktop and even many mobile processors achieve.

However, the M-5Y71 may be acceptable for light, bursty tasks that do not require sustained CPU throughput. The 5W TDP and integrated HD 5300 graphics make it suitable for ultra-portable or fanless designs where power consumption is a primary concern. Web browsing, document editing, email, and media playback are workloads that can run within the chip’s capabilities, though even these may feel sluggish if multiple tabs or background processes are active. The 2.90 GHz boost clock provides a brief speed burst for single-threaded tasks, but the 1.20 GHz base clock means sustained loads will drop significantly.

The chip’s performance parity with older AMD desktop parts like the Athlon II X3 460 and Phenom II X4 805 suggests it can handle legacy applications and basic productivity software. It is not a gaming CPU; the integrated graphics and low CPU scores preclude modern titles. For users who prioritize battery life and silence over performance, and who stick to lightweight applications, the M-5Y71 could be a viable choice—provided they accept its very low benchmark standing. For anyone needing even moderate multi-core performance, the data clearly shows that the M-5Y71 is not the right tool.