, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Intel Core i5-540UM vs Intel Core i5-470UM vs Intel Core i5-480M

Intel Core i5-540UM

► remove from comparison

The Intel Core i5-540UM is a Ultra Low Voltage dual-core processor for small and light laptops. It is clocked with 1.2 - 2 GHz (if Turbo Boost is enabled). Each core is based on the Nehalem (Westmere) micro-architecture. Hyperthreading enables the Dual Core CPU to handle 4 threads at once (for a better usage of the pipeline). AES, VT-d and Trusted Execution are activated (compared to the 430UM).

A feature of the new Core i5-540UM is the integrated graphics card (called Intel HD Graphics) and memory controller. Both are on a separate die that is still manufactured in 45nm whereas the CPU die is already manufactured in the new 32nm process.

Due to the integrated memory controller, the HyperThreading and Turbo Boost, the  Core i5-540UM is faster than a similar clocked Core 2 Duo (1.2 GHz) in all (us known) applications and benchmarks. Still the Turbo Boost may not trigger very often (sometimes it is even not activated in the BIOS) and therefore the maximum of 2 GHz may not be important.

The integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD (GMA HD) graphics card is between 166-500 MHz (Turbo Boost) and therefore the base speed is clearly below the non low voltage versions. The performance should still be faster than the old GMA 4500MHD.

The power consumption of 18 Watt TDP (max.) counts for the whole package and therefore it is clearly better than the 17 Watt TDP of the Core 2 Duo SL-series (CPU alone).

Intel Core i5-470UM

► remove from comparison

The Intel Core i5-470UM is a Ultra Low Voltage dual-core processor for small and light laptops. It is clocked with 1.3 - 1.8 GHz (if Turbo Boost is enabled). Each core is based on the Nehalem (Westmere) micro-architecture. Hyperthreading enables the Dual Core CPU to handle 4 threads at once (for a better usage of the pipeline). AES, VT-d and Trusted Execution are deactivated for the 470UM, compared to the i7 UM CPUs.

The faster i5-560UM and i7-660UM are also clocked at 1.3 GHz but feature a higher TurboBoost frequency.

A feature of the Core i5-470UM is the integrated graphics card (called Intel HD Graphics) and memory controller. Both are on a separate die that is still manufactured in 45nm whereas the CPU die is already manufactured in the new 32nm process.

Due to the integrated memory controller, the HyperThreading and Turbo Boost, the  Core i5-470UM is faster than a similar clocked Core 2 Duo (1.3 GHz) in all (us known) applications and benchmarks. Still the Turbo Boost may not trigger very often (sometimes it is even not activated in the BIOS) and therefore the maximum of 1.8 GHz may not be important.

The integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD (GMA HD) graphics card is clocked between 166-500 MHz (Turbo Boost) and therefore the base speed is clearly below the non low voltage versions. The performance should still be faster than the old GMA 4500MHD.

The power consumption of 18 Watt TDP (max.) counts for the whole package and therefore it is clearly better than the 17 Watt TDP of the Core 2 Duo SL-series (CPU alone).

Intel Core i5-480M

► remove from comparison Intel 480M

The Intel Core i5-480M is a mid-range dual core CPU for laptops and clocks (due to the Turbo Mode) from 2.66 to 2.9 GHz. Each core is based on the Nehalem (Westmere) micro-architecture. Hyperthreading enables the Dual Core CPU to handle 4 threads at once (for a better usage of the pipeline). Compared to the Core i5-540M, the 480M does most likely not support AES, VT-d and Trusted Execution functions and features a slower Turbo Boost (2.9 versus 3.06 GHz). However, the base clock rate is slightly higher.

A feature of the new Core i5-480M is the integrated graphics card called GMA HD and memory controller. Both are on a separate die that is still manufactured in 45nm whereas the CPU die is already manufactured in the new 32nm process.

The performance of the Core i5-480M is on average faster than a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo T9800 and in some benchmarks even faster than the fastest Core 2 Duo T9900 (e.g. 3DMark 06 CPU Score). Therefore, the Core i5-480M is a high end dual core cpu which should handle all daily work and gaming tasks. Only the quad core i7 CPUs can be noticeably faster at tasks that require four or more threads (e.g. rendering).

The integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD (GMA HD) graphics card is known to be clocked up to 500-766 MHz and should be clearly faster than the old GMA 4500MHD. A GeForce 9400M (ION) should still be a faster (especially as Nvidia and ATI cards have a better driver support than Intel up to now). According to rumors, the GMA core will also use the Turbo Mode regulate the clock speed.

The power consumption of 35 Watt TDP (max.) counts for the whole package and therefore it is clearly better than the 35 Watt TDP of the Core 2 Duo T-series (CPU alone). Due to the Turbo Boost, the Core i5 is likely to use the whole TDP of 35 Watt under load and therefore can use more power than a similar specified Core 2 Duo. In Idle mode, the i5 uses clearly less power than the Core 2 Duo CPUs.

Intel Core i5-540UMIntel Core i5-470UMIntel Core i5-480M
Intel Core i5Intel Core i5Intel Core i5
ArrandaleArrandaleArrandale
Series: Core i5 Arrandale
Intel Core i5-580M2.67 - 3.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560M2.67 - 3.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-480M2.67 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540M2.53 - 3.07 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-460M2.53 - 2.8 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520M2.4 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-450M2.4 - 2.66 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430M2.26 - 2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560UM1.33 - 2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-470UM1.33 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i5-540UM1.2 - 2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520UM1.06 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430UM1.2 - 1.73 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-580M2.67 - 3.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560M2.67 - 3.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-480M2.67 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540M2.53 - 3.07 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-460M2.53 - 2.8 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520M2.4 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-450M2.4 - 2.66 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430M2.26 - 2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560UM1.33 - 2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i5-470UM1.33 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540UM1.2 - 2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520UM1.06 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430UM1.2 - 1.73 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-580M2.67 - 3.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560M2.67 - 3.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i5-480M2.67 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540M2.53 - 3.07 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-460M2.53 - 2.8 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520M2.4 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-450M2.4 - 2.66 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430M2.26 - 2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560UM1.33 - 2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-470UM1.33 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540UM1.2 - 2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520UM1.06 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430UM1.2 - 1.73 GHz2 / 43 MB
1200 - 2000 MHz1333 - 1867 MHz2666 - 2933 MHz
250025002400
512 KB512 KB512 KB
3 MB3 MB3 MB
2 / 42 / 42 / 4
18 18 35
382+177 382+177 382+177
32 32 32
81+114 mm281+114 mm281+114 mm2
105 °C105 °C
BGA1288BGA1288BGA1288, PGA988
Intel HD Graphics 166-500MHz, DDR3-800 Memory Controller, Turbo Boost, Hyper-Threading, Virtualization Technology VT-x, Intel 64, Idle States, Enhanced Speedstep, Thermal Monitoring, Fast Memory Access, Flex Memory Access, Execute Disable BitIntel HD Graphics 166-500MHz, DDR3-800 Memory Controller, Turbo Boost, Hyper-Threading, Virtualization Technology VT-x, Intel 64, Idle States, Enhanced Speedstep, Thermal Monitoring, Fast Memory Access, Flex Memory Access, Execute Disable Bitintegrated DDR3 memory controller, GMA HD Graphics (500-766MHz), MMX, SSE (1,2,3,3S, 4.1, 3.2), EM64T, VT-x
Architecturex86x86x86
$250 U.S.
Intel Core i5 540UMIntel Core i5 470UMIntel Core i5 480M
128 KB

Benchmarks

Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
1 470UM +
min: 1.2     avg: 1.3     median: 1.3 (3%)     max: 1.35 Points
180%
1 480M +
min: 2.18     avg: 2.3     median: 2.3 (5%)     max: 2.37 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
1 470UM +
min: 1906     avg: 1970     median: 1972.5 (18%)     max: 2022
162%
1 480M +
min: 3130     avg: 3192     median: 3191 (28%)     max: 3248
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
1 470UM +
min: 3775     avg: 3987     median: 3940 (6%)     max: 4255
180%
1 480M +
min: 6939     avg: 7187     median: 7080 (11%)     max: 7553
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
1 470UM +
min: 4611     avg: 4826     median: 4832.5 (5%)     max: 5036 Points
177%
1 480M +
min: 8159     avg: 8558     median: 8556 (8%)     max: 8969 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
1 470UM +
min: 2404     avg: 2459     median: 2455 (17%)     max: 2524 Points
159%
1 480M +
min: 3831     avg: 3928     median: 3912 (28%)     max: 4030 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
1 470UM +
min: 980     avg: 1087     median: 1072.5 (13%)     max: 1221.98 s
107%
1 480M +
min: 539     avg: 564     median: 556.6 (7%)     max: 600.245 s
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
1 470UM +
min: 31.5     avg: 34.7     median: 34 (7%)     max: 39.342 s
103%
1 480M +
min: 17     avg: 18     median: 18 (4%)     max: 19.19 s
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
1 470UM +
min: 1602     avg: 1684     median: 1689 (9%)     max: 1755 Points
175%
1 480M +
min: 2579     avg: 2880     median: 2954 (16%)     max: 3093 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
1 470UM +
min: 23.946     avg: 25     median: 24 (5%)     max: 28 s
102%
1 480M +
min: 15     avg: 15     median: 15 (3%)     max: 15.2 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
1 470UM +
min: 55     avg: 56.3     median: 55.7 (2%)     max: 58 s
101%
1 480M +
min: 35     avg: 36.1     median: 36 (2%)     max: 37 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
1 470UM +
min: 1297     avg: 1315     median: 1304.5 (6%)     max: 1353 s
102%
1 480M +
min: 842     avg: 852     median: 851 (4%)     max: 866 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 470UM +
20970 MIPS (10%)
182%
1 480M +
min: 33210     avg: 38100     median: 38100 (18%)     max: 42990 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
1 470UM +
16180 MFLOPS (12%)
184%
1 480M +
min: 29000     avg: 29750     median: 29750 (23%)     max: 30500 MFLOPS
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
100%
1 470UM +
4329 Points (27%)
178%
1 480M +
7718 Points (48%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 CPU
100%
1 470UM +
min: 5.4     avg: 5.5     median: 5.6 (71%)     max: 5.6 Points
124%
1 480M +
min: 6.8     avg: 6.9     median: 6.9 (88%)     max: 6.9 Points
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
1 480M +
min: 7113     avg: 7765     median: 7845 (9%)     max: 8255 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Physics
100%
1 480M +
min: 2640     avg: 2744     median: 2741 (10%)     max: 2854 Points

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i5-470UM → NAN% n=

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i5-480M → NAN% n=

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

v1.16
log 14. 23:20:48

#0 checking url part for id 999 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 1242 +0s ... 0s

#2 checking url part for id 1519 +0s ... 0s

#3 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#4 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:08:06 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#5 composed specs +0.009s ... 0.009s

#6 did output specs +0s ... 0.009s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 999 +0s ... 0.009s

#8 got single benchmarks 999 +0.005s ... 0.014s

#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 1242 +0.001s ... 0.015s

#10 got single benchmarks 1242 +0.012s ... 0.027s

#11 getting avg benchmarks for device 1519 +0s ... 0.027s

#12 got single benchmarks 1519 +0.024s ... 0.051s

#13 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.051s

#14 min, max, avg, median took s +0.011s ... 0.062s

#15 return log +0s ... 0.062s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)