Intel Pentium G4560 Review: Cannibalizing the i3 | GamersNexus
Gaming Benchmarks
Watch Dogs 2 CPU Benchmark — Intel G4560
Watch Dogs 2 places the Intel Pentium G4560 at around 53FPS AVG, with 1% lows at 42 and GN’s 0.1% lows at 37FPS AVG. Considering we’re operating with High settings, this isn’t too bad – and we’ve got a Watch Dogs 2 tuning guide for geometry reductions to help save on performance, if that’s needed. But we’re not testing in a vacuum. Versus the Intel i3-6300, which we purchased last year for $145, the G4560 is nearly equal in performance – it’s a difference of about 2% in average FPS. We don’t have the i3-7100 or 7300, but the i3-6300 is only a few percentage points different in performance from either of these – the $120 i3-7100 clocks at 3.9GHz, making it 11% faster in frequency than the 3.5GHz G4560, and the i3-7300 clocks at 4.0GHz and costs $150. To be fair, the 7400 also has an extra megabyte of cache, but it’s also about 2x the cost of the G4560.
Regardless, we do have the 7350K stock CPU with its higher base and boost, and that one holds a lead of about 25% over the one-third-the-cost G4560. The G4560, with its i3-6300-matching performance, looks to be a good deal so far. This is somewhat reminiscent of the G3258, but better. It is a challenger to Intel’s own i3 market, with performance levels comparable to a 2500K.
Just for some perspective, we’ll highlight the i5-7500 and the R5 1500X. Respectively, these chips run averages that are 52% and 39% faster than the G4560. That said, if you’re going to be on a tight budget where high-end GPUs are not possible, the gains aren’t going to actually matter until a point where the GPU becomes powerful enough to push into bottleneck territory.
Ashes of the Singularity & Escalation — G4560 Benchmark
The AOTS and Escalation benchmarks completed flawlessly this time, again unlike the Phenom IIs. Predictably, the G4560 scored poorly in both, although results look less favorable in Escalation due to limited data.
18.9 FPS is nearly as good as the stock 2500K and the FX-8370, but the 0.1% low is (slightly) higher than both. Ashes of the Singularity is a DX12 benchmark optimized for high-threadcount CPUs, though, and the G4560 is certainly not that.
GTA V CPU Benchmark — Intel G4560 vs. i3
Playing GTA V at 1080p and with Very High and Ultra settings, the Intel Pentium G4560 operates an average FPS of 101, with GN 1% lows at 72 and 0.1% lows at 66FPS. This leads the CPU to be flanked by the FX-8370 and i5-2500K stock CPUs, with the G4560 mostly tied to the latter and outperforming the former by 7.9%.
The more SKU-comparable i3-6300, meanwhile, runs an average FPS of 112, with 1% lows at 80 and 0.1% lows at 73. The 6300 is about 11.5% faster than the G4560, here, showing some meaningful gains in this particular game. The i3-7350K, for what it’s worth, runs its averages stock at 121FPS, leading the G4560 by 20% in performance. Overclocking the i3-7350K doesn’t appear here, as it encounters the same GTA V issue that we’ve been profiling throughout the first quarter.
With an adequate GPU, GTA V is completely playable on a CPU with an MSRP $4 higher than the game itself on Steam.
Metro: Last Light CPU Benchmark — Intel Pentium G4560
Metro was the only test that visibly stuttered more than expected. The uncharacteristically low 0.1% and 1% lows reflect this, although the average is normal. The i3-7350K experienced similar issues to an even greater degree, and we chose not to include those results in the final review. The same effect is visible on many of the other i5s, i3s, and HT-disabled i7s that we’ve tested, i.e. CPUs with fewer than 8 threads.
Total War: Warhammer CPU Benchmark — Intel Pentium G4560
Keep in mind that Total War: Warhammer received an update back during our Ryzen Revisit, improving the game’s frametime performance and consistency on both Intel CPUs and Ryzen CPUs. Only the line items with asterisks have thus far been updated, so we need to rerun some of the lower-end Intel CPUs. That said, the difference in averages is a couple percent at best; this update was really something that primarily affected 0.
1% low performance and AMD SMT performance.
That made clear, the Intel Pentium G4560 operates at 109FPS AVG in Total War: Warhammer, with its lows at 64FPS. We are approaching performance levels of the i3-6300 CPU at 114FPS AVG and 66FPS 1% lows, with the i3-6300 running about 4.6% faster than the G4560, despite its initial cost of $145. The i3-7100 and 7300 would perform similarly to the 6300, with a couple percent gain on the 7300.
The Intel i3-7350K stock CPU operates an average framerate of about 122FPS, leading the G4560 by about 12% in performance, and leading by about 2.5x in price.
Again with this game, as long as you’re not going to be running a GPU of $200+ class anyway, there’s not a huge concern of bottlenecking.
Battlefield 1 CPU Benchmark — Intel Pentium G4560
Finally, Battlefield 1 will round-out our testing for the video, with the rest of the benchmarks taking place in the article linked in the description below.
The Intel Pentium G4560 is able to handle our Battlefield 1 test at 112FPS AVG, but keep in mind that 64-slot servers with a large amount of actors near the player will linearly drive numbers down.
Ultimately, we’re just looking at deltas between parts, anyway.
So, 112 – that puts us fairly close to the i5-2500K stock CPU, again ahead of the FX-8370 CPU, and puts the i3-6300 about 7.7% ahead of the Pentium G4560. These gains for the i3s would be reasonable, except the price makes it sort of a tough argument – price jumps of $50 minimum, $70 for the 6300 and 7300 line, and gains of under 10%. Considering someone in this price bracket is on a tight budget, the $50 or $70 would better go toward other components.
Conclusion: Intel Pentium G4560 Value Exceeds i3-Class
In gaming, the closest equivalent seems to be the stock i5-2500K, which we just revisited. For a more modern comparison, something like the i3-6300 (comparable to the i3-7100 and, although it has more cache, i3-7300) perform not too distantly from the G4560. Considering the price disparity is about 2x versus the i3-class CPUs for a ~10% gain (ignoring the 7350K), we cannot reasonably recommend the Intel i3 line for gaming at this time.
Intel’s armor is starting to crack: The i5 range is under heavy assault by R5 CPUs (like the R5 1600 — $220), which we now recommend in most cases, with HEDT thoroughly challenged by lower-cost R7 CPUs. Intel holds its ground in two places, now: The absolute high-end for gaming-only builds, where the i7-7700K remains uncontested, and the absolute low-end for gaming-only builds, where the G4560 takes shots at Intel’s own i3 CPUs.
We shouldn’t even get started on the 7350K, really, seeing as we already remarked on its “good idea plagued with bad price” model in our review: i3-7350Ks are going for $170 on Newegg at the time of this writing (ostensibly on sale), a whopping 2.65x of the G4560’s MSRP.
For pure gaming, the price-to-performance ratio is truly impressive: paired with an inexpensive GPU like a GTX 1050 ($110) or forthcoming RX 560, it can run new games at 1080p/High readily. There are at least a couple other use cases: the very low temperatures and compatibility with modern hardware make it a possible candidate for a cheap small form factor PC, the LGA 1151 socket means that it could be used as an inexpensive placeholder for a better processor.
The integrated GPU, which we don’t typically test as a gaming-centric site, means that a functional system could be built for $65 plus the cost of a motherboard and PSU and upgraded later.
Two cores and no capacity for overclocking limit its useful lifespan in the AAA gaming realm, but at the end of the day, $65 is about as cheap as a brand-new processor gets. The competition from Intel is mainly their low-end i3 CPUs. Ignore the 7350K — we felt that it was priced a bit too high at the time, and in that respect the G4560 clearly wins out. For a budget with hard limits, this is a good fit.
Editorial: Patrick Lathan & Steve Burke
Video Producer: Andrew Coleman
« Prev Next
What’s the difference between an Intel Core i3, i5 and i7?
Intel’s first Core processors made their debut in 2006. At this point, children born in the same year are almost old enough to drink. Over a dozen generations of Intel Core i3, Core i5, and Core i7 CPUs have come and gone since then but most consumers are still asking the same kinds of questions.
Intel Core i3, Core i5 or Core i7? What’s the difference? Is it worth it to own a CPU with more cores, a faster clock-speed or advanced features like hyper-threading?
Unless you’re looking to embrace AMD’s new Ryzen processors (Looking to learn which CPU is best: Intel Core i7 or AMD Ryzen?) you’re almost certainly going to have to make the choice between Intel’s three families of consumer-grade processors.
Core i3, Core i5, Core i7 — the difference in a nutshell
If you want to boil things down to something plain and simple, then generally speaking, “most” Core i7 CPUs are better than most Core i5 CPUs, which are in turn better than most Core i3 CPUs.
Below that, you’ve got fare like the Intel Celeron and Intel Pentium processors. We’re not going to go to deeply into those and how they compare to Intel’s Core processor, since this article is specifically focused on the difference between Intel’s Core i3, Core i5 and i7 CPUs – but they do merit a mention.
Dreamstime: Chiradech Chotchung
If you’re building your first PC, the main thing you need to keep in mind here is that the 3, 5 and 7 attached to each family of Intel Core processors are simply meant to be indicative of their relative processing power. They’ve got nothing to do with the number of cores in each CPU nor the speed of each. Intel’s Core i7 CPUs don’t have seven cores nor do Core i3 have three cores.
Which family an Intel Core CPU falls into is based on a collection of criteria involving their number of cores, clock speed (in GHz) and cache size. At the most basic level, these numbers reflect where each class of Intel Core CPU sit relative to one another and are intended to give consumers an idea of the kind of performance they should expect from each.
Essentially, the idea that Intel are looking to convey with this CPU classification system is that PC builders should expect:
- An Intel Core i3 to provide adequate performance for basic tasks
- An Intel Core i5 to provide good performance for most tasks
- An Intel Core i7 to provide great performance for the most demanding of tasks
Since some older i7 CPUs might not out-perform more recent i5 CPUs, these designations shouldn’t always be taken as gospel but if you’re after a short and easy way to understand which processor is better, the numbers attached to each Intel Core family serve nicely.
Intel’s Core i3, i5 and i7 processors can also be grouped in terms of their target devices. Some are intended for us inside laptops, others are intended for use with desktop PCs. Wattage is the big differentiator here, since CPUs inside mobile devices generally have to make do with less power draw,
In some cases, the difference in specs and performance for the desktop and laptop variants of Intel’s i5 and i7 CPUs can be quite significant. However, to avoid confusion, let’s start by exclusively talking about the desktop variants.
Number of cores
Intel
While the number of cores inside an Intel Core CPU isn’t everything, the more cores there are, the more tasks (known as threads) can be served at the same time. This means that a PC with a higher core-count is going to be better for tasks where multithreading is important, such as web servers, web browsers and some video games.
While there isn’t a hard and fast rule around it, you’re also more likely to find less cores in a Core i3 than you are in a Core i5 or i7.
This used to be just two cores, but more recently Core i3 processors with higher core counts have been released. For example, some 12th generation Intel Core i3 processors can have up to 10 cores.
The reason for this is that i3 processors are designed to hit a lower price-point more than they are push boundaries for performance. They tend to be found inside PCs that target a more budget-conscious market-segment where the need for a device to be affordable eclipses the demand for higher performance.
As you’d expect, Intel’s Core i5 processors tend to be more powerful than their i3 counterparts. Part of this comes down to faster average clock speeds. Part of this comes down to additional cores. More cores means these CPUs can handle more threads at once and faster clock speeds mean they can complete tasks more efficiently.
In years past, Intel’s Core i5 CPU line-up has generally been built around CPUs with up to four-cores. However, in recent times (like the 12th-Gen Alder Lake refresh), Intel have upped the ante to between 6-12 cores for many of their i5 CPUs.
This includes processors like the Intel Core i5-12400, Intel Core i5-12600KF and Intel Core i5-12500.
Intel
Lastly, you’ve got Intel’s Core i7 CPUs. Again, you’re looking at both faster average clock speeds and additional cores. Intel’s Kaby Lake i7 Core CPUs included only four cores but the more modern Alder Lake family of i7 CPUs feature up to 16 cores and standard clock speeds that range go up to 5.00 Ghz.
At this point, you may be wondering just how important clock speeds are. The answer: pretty important. However, when it comes to clock speed, there are a few things you’ll want to keep in mind.
The first is that, in general, a higher clock speed is better. However, due to the thermal issues involved, processors with more cores tend to operate at a lower clock speed. Often-times, choosing a CPU involves choosing between a CPU capable of delivering faster clock-speeds or choosing one with more cores.
This brings us to the second thing you’ll want to keep in mind: faster might be better but it’s not always necessary.
Although a faster core might be more efficient than a slower one, it might not necessarily be better for the tasks you want to use your computer to be better at.
Many applications only run single-threads while others are designed to utilize multiple. For cases where the latter applies, such as video rendering and gaming, having more cores is going to offer up an enormous improvement over having faster ones.
Rather than run out and drop the cash on the CPU with the fastest clock speed you can find, it might be worth thinking about what the clock speed you actually need looks like. To that end, it’s worth looking up the recommend system specifications for the game or software you’ll be running on your new PC.
For more everyday things like web browsing, an i5 processor with a higher clock speed is probably going to offer more bang for your buck than a beefier i7 might. Still, sometimes it’s more important to have those extra cores than an i5 or i7 CPU and often-times the choice between one Intel Core CPU and another will come down to whether you want to have a CPU with more cores or one with better clock speeds.
Are you building a PC that does the things you might do or are you happy to settle for one that can do the things you need it to do?
The other thing you’ll want to factor in here is that there’s an important difference between a CPUs standard clock speed and turbo clock speed. The former is the normal clock speed that an Intel CPU is able to deliver. The latter refers to the fastest speeds it can reach using Intel’s Turbo Boost features.
These sorts of technologies, found exclusively in Intel CPUs, are one of the key things that separate i3, i5 and i7 processors – since the more-affordable i3 CPU (plus some i5 CPUs) often don’t include them.
Intel Turbo Boost explained
Intel
Intel’s Turbo Boost feature allows a processor to dynamically increase its clock speed whenever the need arises. The maximum amount that Turbo Boost can raise clock speed at any given time is dependent on a number of factors. This includes the number of active cores, the estimated current consumption, the estimated power consumption and the overall processor temperature.
Using the Core i5-12600H as an example, its maximum allowable processor frequency is 4.5 GHz while its base clock speed is 3.30 GHz. A 12th-Gen Alder Lake i3 CPU like the Core i3-12300 has a higher base clock speed of 3.50 GHz but a lower max turbo frequency of 4.40 GHz.
Cache size
Intel
Another thing that sets Intel’s i3, i5 and i7 apart is cache size.
Both your computer’s RAM and its CPU cache serve as holding areas for frequently used data. Without them, the CPU would have to keep on relying on your hard disk drive for everything, which would slow everything down and cause even simple tasks to take a lot longer.
See, whenever a CPU finds that it keeps on using the same data over and over, it stores that data in its cache. A CPU’s Cache is just like RAM, only faster — since it’s built into the CPU itself. If RAM’s value as a component is billed around its ability to minimise interaction with your PC’s hard drive, the value of your CPU’s cache is that it minimises interaction with your PC’s RAM.
As you might be able to guess, a CPU with a larger cache allows for more data to be accessed faster. This is one major reason why an i7 outperforms an i5 — and why an i5 outperforms an i3.
What’s more, CPU cache sizes have grown significantly in recent years.
Intel’s 4th Gen Haswell Core i3 processors had either 3MB or 4MB of cache, Haswell Core i5s had either 4MB or 6MB of cache and Haswell Core i7 CPUs had a hefty 8MB of cache, except for the i7-4770R, which had only 6MB.
In contrast, Intel’s 12th-gen Alder Lake CPUs not only have more cache (for example, up to 12 GB in Intel 12-gen Core i3 processors), they also sport a new and improved cache type called Smart Cache.
Smart Cache makes caching more efficient by sharing the cache memory between the cores of the processor, which has the result of improving the overall performance and efficiency of the CPU.
Hyper-Threading
Supplied
Although the analogy isn’t perfect, Hyper-Threading is basically the equivalent of something like turbo-boost when it comes to increasing the power of your CPU’s cores.
In normal circumstances, only one thread can be served by one CPU core at a time. If a CPU is a dual-core, then supposedly only two threads can be served simultaneously. If your CPU has four cores, it can handle four threads at once. If your CPU has six cores….you get the idea.
Hyper-Threading changes this dynamic in a pretty significant way because it allows a single core to serve multiple threads at once through virtualisation.
For instance, a dual-core Core i3 with hyper-threading can serve two threads per core rather than the regular one per core. In other words, a total of four threads can run simultaneously and a quad-core Core i5 processor that doesn’t support Hyper-Threading is going to be about as capable as a dual-core Core i3 processor that does – at least when it comes to the number of threads it can handle at once.
This is one of the many reasons why Core i7 processors are the considered the crème de la crème when it comes to mainstream desktop processors.
They boast more cores than i5 and i3 processors which has obvious Hyper-Threading benefits.
Intel’s Core i9 CPUs push this even further, by increasing the core-count even higher. For instance, Intel’s Alder Lake i9 CPUs go as high as 16-cores and 24-threads.
Which one should I get?
If you’re the kind of person who wants to buy or build a computer that’ll last, you have to ask yourself what you’re going to use it for.
If you do a lot of things at the same time on your PC, then it might be worth forking out the extra cash for an i7. Gamers in particular will want to opt for an i7, as it’s always better to sit closer to the recommended system requirements than its minimum system requirements. However, if you only use your PC to check emails, do some banking, read the news, and download a bit of music, you’re probably going to be OK with the cheaper i5 or i3.
The other deciding factor here should be whether or not the things you’re doing on your next PC are going to be things that can actually make use of technologies like Hyper-Threading.
Find out which one to choose in 2023.
Benefits of Intel Pentium 2020M
|
Release price |
|
$134 -91 $ (-40.4%) better than vs 225 $ |
|
Value for money |
|
72.7% 49.4% (212%) better than vs 23.3% |
Benefits of Intel Core i3-3130M
Comparison winner
|
Threads |
|
4 2 (100%) better than vs 2 |
|
Base frequency |
|
2.6 GHz 0.2 GHz (8.3%) better than vs 2.4 GHz |
|
Maximum frequency |
|
2.6 GHz 0. vs 2.4 GHz |
|
Passmark |
|
2181 945 (76.5%) better than vs 1236 |
2 GHz (8.3%) better than | General information | |
|
Type |
|
| For laptops | For laptops |
|
Architecture code name |
|
| Ivy Bridge | Ivy Bridge |
|
Cores A large number of cores improves performance in multi-threaded applications. |
|
| 2 | 2 |
|
Threads More threads help the cores process information more efficiently. Real performance will be noticeable in very specific tasks (video editing, databases). |
|
| 2 | 4
2 (100%) better than |
|
Base frequency |
|
| 2.4GHz | 2.6 GHz
Better than at 0.2 GHz (8.3%) |
|
Process |
|
| 22 nm | 22 nm |
|
Chip size |
|
| 118 mm2 | 118 mm2 |
|
Number of transistors |
|
| 1 million | no data |
|
Maximum frequency Faster clocked processors perform more calculations per second and thus provide better performance. |
|
| 2.4GHz | 2.6 GHz
Better than at 0.2 GHz (8.3%) |
|
Support 64 bit |
|
|
Max. number of processors in configuration |
|
| 1 | 1 |
|
Socket |
|
| FCPGA988 | FCBGA1023, FCPGA988 |
|
AMD-V |
|
|
Series |
|
| Intel Pentium | Intel Core i3 |
|
Release price |
|
| $134
-91 $ (-40. |
225 $ |
|
Value for money The sum of all the advantages of the device divided by its price. The more%, the better the quality per unit price in comparison with all analogues. |
|
| 72.7%
49.4% (212%) better than |
23.3% |
|
Maximum core temperature |
|
| 90 °C | 90 °C |
|
vPro |
|
|
TXT Intel Trusted Execution Technology for hardware-based malware protection. For each protected program, the processor allocates its own isolated section of RAM. |
|
|
PCI Express revision |
|
| 2.0 | 2.0 |
|
Number of PCI-Express lanes |
|
| 16 | 16 |
|
Demand Based Switching |
|
| — | — |
|
Identity Protection |
|
| n/a | + |
|
Flex Memory Access |
|
| + | + |
|
Quick Sync |
|
| n/a | + |
|
eDP |
|
| + | + |
|
HDMI |
|
| + | + |
|
My WiFi |
|
| + | + |
|
FDI |
|
| + | + |
|
Anti-Theft |
|
| — | + |
|
Fast Memory Access |
|
| + | + |
|
CRT |
|
| + | + |
|
Level 1 Cache The fastest level of cache that works directly with the core. |
|
| 64K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
|
L2 cache |
|
| 256K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
|
Level 3 cache |
|
| 2 MB (total) | 3 MB (total) |
|
Power Demand (TDP) The calculated heat output shows the average heat dissipation in load operation, |
|
| 35W | 35 W |
|
EDB |
|
| + | + |
|
Clear Video |
|
| — | no data |
|
InTru 3D |
|
| — | + |
|
DisplayPort |
|
| + | + |
|
SDVO |
|
| + | + |
4%) better than 
The larger the cache, the better the performance. | 2181
945 (76. |
||
|
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core |
||
| 3299 | no data | |
|
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core |
||
| 6312 | no data | |
|
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core |
||
| 1388 | no data | |
|
x264 encoding pass 1 |
||
| 61 | no data | |
|
x264 encoding pass 2 |
||
| 11 | no data | |
|
3DMark06 CPU |
||
| 2449 | no data | |
|
Geekbench 2 |
||
| 4060 | no data | |
5%) better than | Technologies and Advanced Instructions | |
|
Extended Instructions |
|
Intel® SSE4. 1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
Intel® AVX |
|
Turbo Boost |
|
| — | — |
|
Idle States |
|
|
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) Intel’s technology that allows the processor to slow down to its lowest frequency to conserve power when the processor is idle. |
|
|
Thermal Monitoring |
|
|
Hyper-Threading A hardware technology from Intel that allows multiple threads to be processed on each processor core. For server applications, the performance improvement is up to 30%. |
|
|
AVX The presence of AVX instructions improves performance in floating point and processor-intensive operations |
|
| RAM options | ||
| DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600 | ||
|
Allowable memory The maximum amount of RAM that can be used with this processor. |
||
| 32 GB | 32 GB | |
|
Number of memory channels |
||
| 2 | 2 | |
| Virtualization technologies | ||
|
EPT |
||
|
VT-d Intel virtualization technology allows you to forward devices on the PCI bus to the guest operating system so that it can work with them using its standard tools. |
||
| Integrated graphics | ||
1. 10 GHz |
||
|
Maximum number of monitors |
||
| 3 | 3 | |
|
Clear Video HD |
||
|
Video core The presence of the video core allows you to use your computer without using a video card. |
||
| Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors | + | |
Intel Pentium Gold 7505 vs. Core i3 1215U:
performance comparison
VS
Intel Pentium Gold 7505
Intel Core i3 1215U
What is better: 2-core Intel Pentium Gold 7505 at 2.0 GHz or Core i3 1215U with 6 cores at 1.2 GHz? To find out, read our comparison test of these 10nm laptop processors in popular benchmarks, games and heavy applications.
- Overview
- Differences
- Performance
- Features
- Comments
Overview
Overview and comparison of the main metrics from NanoReview
Single-threaded performance
Single-core benchmark rating
Pentium Gold 7505
46
Core i3 1215U
70
Multi-threaded performance
Tests in benchmarks, where all nuclei are involved in the nuclei
Pentium Gold 7505
12
Core i3 1215u
23
Energy
Energy Effects
Pentium Gold 7501
9000 9000 9000 CEN 78
NanoReview rating
Final processor score
Pentium Gold 7505
37
Core i3 1215U
54
Key differences
What are the main differences between 1215U and 7505
Reasons to choose Intel Core i3 1215U
- Has 4 more physical cores
- Has 6 MB more L3 cache
- Launched 1 year and 5 months later than rival
- 55% faster in single core Geekbe test v5 — 1521 and 983 points
- 26% higher frequency in Turbo Boost (4.
4 GHz vs. 3.5 GHz) - New PCI Express standard — 4.0
Benchmark tests
Compare the results of processor tests in benchmarks
Cinebench R23 (multi -core)
Pentium Gold 7505
N/d
Core i3 1215U
5429
Passmark CPU (one -core)
Pentium Gold 7505
2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302 2302302
+48%
3402
Passmark CPU (multi-core)
Pentium Gold 7505
5233
Core i3 1215U
+118%
11392
Geekbench 5 (single core)
Pentium Gold 7505
982
Core i3 1215U
+54%
1517
Geekbench 5 (multi-core)
Pentium Gold 7505
2239
Core i3 1215U
+106%
4607
Add your Cinebench R23 results
Specifications
List of full technical specifications of Intel Pentium Gold 7505 and Core i3 1215U
General information
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| Release date | October 17, 2020 | February 23, 2022 |
| Type | For laptop | For laptop |
| Instruction set architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 |
| Codename | Tiger Lake | Alder Lake |
| Model number | 7505 | i3-1215U |
| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics Xe G4 48 EUs | UHD Graphics (64EU) |
Processor
| Nuclei | 2 | 2 |
| threads | 4 | 4 |
| Frequency | 2. 0 GHz |
1.2 GHz |
| Max. frequency in Turbo Boost | 3.5 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Cores | — | 4 |
| threads | — | 4 |
| Frequency | — | 0.9 GHz |
| Max. frequency in Turbo Boost | — | 3.3 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 | 6 |
| Number of threads | 4 | 8 |
| Bus frequency | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
| Multiplier | 20x | 12x |
| Bus speed | 4 GT/s | — |
| Level 1 cache | 96KB (per core) | 80KB (per core) |
| Level 2 cache | 1256KB (per core) | 1280KB (per core) |
| Level 3 cache | 4MB (shared) | 10MB (shared) |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| Process | 10 nanometers | 10 nanometers |
| Socket | BGA-1449 | BGA-1744 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 W | 12-15 W |
Max. TDP (Boost) |
— | 55 W |
| Critical temperature | 100°C | 100°C |
| Integrated graphics | Intel UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs | Intel UHD Graphics (64EU) |
| GPU frequency | 300 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost GPU frequency | 1250 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Shader blocks | 384 | 512 |
| TMUs | 24 | 32 |
| ROPs | 12 | 16 |
| Computer units | 48 | 64 |
| TGP | 15 W | 45 W |
iGPU FLOPS
Pentium Gold 7505
0.84 teraflops
Core i3 1215U
1.43 teraflops
memory support 9 11201
| Memory type | DDR4-3200, LPDDR4x-3733 | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200, LPDDR5-5200, LPDDR4x-4267 |
Max. size |
64 GB | 64 GB |
| Number of channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC support | No | No |
Other
| Official site | Site Intel Pentium Gold 7505 | Site Intel Core i3 1215U |
| PCI Express version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| Max. PCI Express lanes | — | 20 |
Poll
What processor do you think is the best?
Pentium Gold 7505
0 (0%)
Core i3 1215U
17 (100%)
Total votes: 17
Competitors
1.
Intel Pentium Gold 7505 or Intel Core i5 1135G7
2.
Intel Pentium Gold 7505 or Intel Core i3 1005G1
3.