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

Intel Core i5-560M vs Intel Core i5-540M

Intel Core i5-560M

► remove from comparison

The Intel Core i5-560M is a high end dual core CPU for laptops and clocks (due to the Turbo Mode) from 2.66 to 3.2 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 i7-580M, the 560M a slightly lower maximum Turbo Boost frequency.

A feature of the new Core i5-560M 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 i5-560M should be a bit beyond the Core i7-620M and therefore the second fastest dual core CPU for laptops in 2010. Compared to the older Core 2 Duo models, the i5-560M should be faster than the T9900. Therefore, the Core i5-560M 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 32nm cpu cores of the Westmere generation can also process some new instructions to accelerate AES encryptions.

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 i5-540M

► remove from comparison Intel 540M

The Intel Core i5-540M is a mid-range dual core CPU for laptops and clocks (due to the Turbo Mode) from 2.53 to 3.06 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 faster Core i7-620M, the 540M only has 3 MB Level 3 Cache and a lower clock speed.

A feature of the new Core i5-540M 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 i5-540M 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 i5-540M 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 32nm cpu cores of the Westmere generation can also process some new instructions to accelerate AES encryptions.

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 i5-560MIntel Core i5-540M
Intel Core i5Intel Core i5
ArrandaleArrandale
Series: Core i5 Arrandale
Intel Core i5-580M compare2.67 - 3.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i5-560M2.67 - 3.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-480M compare2.67 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540M2.53 - 3.07 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-460M compare2.53 - 2.8 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520M compare2.4 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-450M compare2.4 - 2.66 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430M compare2.26 - 2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560UM compare1.33 - 2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-470UM compare1.33 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540UM compare1.2 - 2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520UM compare1.06 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430UM compare1.2 - 1.73 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-580M compare2.67 - 3.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560M2.67 - 3.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-480M compare2.67 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i5-540M2.53 - 3.07 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-460M compare2.53 - 2.8 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520M compare2.4 - 2.93 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-450M compare2.4 - 2.66 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430M compare2.26 - 2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-560UM compare1.33 - 2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-470UM compare1.33 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-540UM compare1.2 - 2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-520UM compare1.06 - 1.87 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i5-430UM compare1.2 - 1.73 GHz2 / 43 MB
2667 - 3200 MHz2530 - 3066 MHz
25002500
128 KB128 KB
512 KB512 KB
3 MB3 MB
2 / 42 / 4
35 35
382+177 382+177
32 32
81+114 mm281+114 mm2
105 °C105 °C
PGA988BGA1288, PGA988
Turbo Boost, Hyper Threading, Enhanced Speedstep, integrierte GMA HD 500-733MHz, Dual Channel DDR3 memory controllerTurbo Boost, Hyper Threading, Enhanced Speedstep, integrierte GMA HD 733MHz,
Architecturex86x86
$225 U.S.$257 U.S.
Intel Core i5 560MIntel Core i5 540M

Benchmarks

Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
560M +
min: 2.36     avg: 2.4     median: 2.4 (4%)     max: 2.42 Points
min: 2.16     avg: 2.2     median: 2.2 (4%)     max: 2.29 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
560M +
min: 3263     avg: 3346     median: 3306 (30%)     max: 3486
min: 3061     avg: 3141     median: 3132.5 (28%)     max: 3214
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
560M +
min: 7411     avg: 7487     median: 7466 (12%)     max: 7592
min: 6545     avg: 6950     median: 7030.5 (11%)     max: 7211
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
560M +
min: 8593     avg: 8869     median: 8877.5 (8%)     max: 9127 Points
min: 7844     avg: 8349     median: 8408 (8%)     max: 8600 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
560M +
min: 4001     avg: 4112     median: 4090 (29%)     max: 4268 Points
min: 3237     avg: 3785     median: 3938 (28%)     max: 3991 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
560M +
min: 536     avg: 555     median: 542.3 (6%)     max: 600.321 s
100%
540M +
min: 569     avg: 740     median: 576.8 (7%)     max: 1352 s
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
560M +
min: 17     avg: 17.9     median: 17.7 (4%)     max: 19.344 s
100%
540M +
min: 18.1     avg: 18.8     median: 18.5 (4%)     max: 19.9 s
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
560M +
min: 3061     avg: 3104     median: 3115.5 (17%)     max: 3122 Points
min: 2643     avg: 2814     median: 2826 (16%)     max: 2905 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
560M +
min: 14     avg: 14.4     median: 14.2 (3%)     max: 15 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
560M +
min: 33     avg: 35     median: 35.6 (2%)     max: 36.442 s
100%
540M +
min: 35     avg: 36.2     median: 36 (2%)     max: 37 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
560M +
min: 789     avg: 804     median: 806 (4%)     max: 825 s
100%
540M +
min: 822     avg: 848     median: 850 (4%)     max: 867 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 540M +
min: 32820     avg: 34953     median: 33495 (16%)     max: 40000 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
1 540M +
min: 26630     avg: 27546     median: 26815 (21%)     max: 29923 MFLOPS
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
100%
560M +
min: 6475     avg: 6964     median: 6964 (44%)     max: 7453 Points
min: 6030     avg: 6499     median: 6498.5 (41%)     max: 6967 Points
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 CPU
100%
560M +
min: 6.7     avg: 6.8     median: 6.8 (87%)     max: 6.9 Points
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
560M +
min: 8234     avg: 8243     median: 8242.5 (10%)     max: 8251 Points
min: 7801     avg: 7897     median: 7904 (9%)     max: 7994 Points

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i5-560M → 100% n=14

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i5-540M → 96% n=14

- 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

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2021, 2020
v1.16
log 21. 14:28:30

#0 checking url part for id 1266 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 533 +0s ... 0s

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

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:09:15 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.009s ... 0.01s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.01s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 1266 +0s ... 0.01s

#7 got single benchmarks 1266 +0.014s ... 0.024s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 533 +0s ... 0.025s

#9 got single benchmarks 533 +0.015s ... 0.04s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.04s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.01s ... 0.049s

#12 return log +0.004s ... 0.053s

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)