Core i5-5200U vs Core m7-6Y75

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core m7-6Y75
2015
2 cores / 4 threads
1.51
Core i5-5200U
2015
2 cores / 4 threads
1.63
+7.9%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking20171955
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core m7Intel Core i5
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Broadwell-U (2015)
Release date1 September 2015 (8 years old)1 March 2015 (9 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$393$281
Current price$773 (2x MSRP)$447 (1.6x MSRP)

Technical specs

Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.2 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cache128 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB256K (per core)
L3 cache4 MB3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size98.57 mm210.3 mm × 9.57 mm82 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistors1750 Million1300 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFCBGA1515FCBGA1168
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+no data
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access++
SIPP+no data
Smart Response++
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
StatusDiscontinuedDiscontinued

Security technologies

Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX+no data
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16 GB16 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth29.8 GB/s25.6 GB/s
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 515Intel HD Graphics 5500
Max video memory16 GB16 GB
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency1 GHz900 MHz
InTru 3D++

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported33
eDP++
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hz2560X1600@60Hz
Max resolution over eDP3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort3840x2160@60Hz3840x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1211.2/12
OpenGL4.54.3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes1012

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

m7-6Y75 1.51
i5-5200U 1.63
+7.9%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

m7-6Y75 2314
i5-5200U 2499
+8%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 8% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

m7-6Y75 3854
i5-5200U 4136
+7.3%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 7% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

m7-6Y75 6302
i5-5200U 8641
+37.1%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 37% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

m7-6Y75 2730
i5-5200U 3361
+23.1%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 23% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

m7-6Y75 19
i5-5200U 18.25
+4.1%

Core m7-6Y75 outperforms Core i5-5200U by 4% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

m7-6Y75 2
i5-5200U 3
+14.2%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 14% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

m7-6Y75 205
i5-5200U 259
+26.3%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 26% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

m7-6Y75 102
i5-5200U 108
+5.9%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 6% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

m7-6Y75 1.08
i5-5200U 1.24
+14.8%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 15% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

m7-6Y75 1.7
+13.3%
i5-5200U 1.5

Core m7-6Y75 outperforms Core i5-5200U by 13% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

m7-6Y75 1625
i5-5200U 2327
+43.2%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 43% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

m7-6Y75 89
+4.3%
i5-5200U 85

Core m7-6Y75 outperforms Core i5-5200U by 4% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

m7-6Y75 16
i5-5200U 16
+3.9%

Core i5-5200U outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by 4% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

m7-6Y75 2755
+10.8%
i5-5200U 2487

Core m7-6Y75 outperforms Core i5-5200U by 11% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

m7-6Y75 5457
+9.3%
i5-5200U 4993

Core m7-6Y75 outperforms Core i5-5200U by 9% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.51 1.63
Integrated graphics card 1.36 1.50
Recency 1 September 2015 1 March 2015
Cost $393 $281
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 15 Watt

We couldn't decide between Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core m7-6Y75 and Core i5-5200U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core m7-6Y75
Core m7-6Y75
Intel Core i5-5200U
Core i5-5200U

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 32 votes

Rate Intel Core m7-6Y75 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 781 vote

Rate Intel Core i5-5200U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Core m7-6Y75 or Core i5-5200U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.