CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2500K vs 5550M

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark and GeekBench

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

TDP

Value

Performance Per Dollar

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 2500K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 2500K

Report a correction
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Significantly higher clock speed 3.3 GHz vs 2.1 GHz More than 55% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 3.7 GHz vs 3.1 GHz Around 20% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly better geekbench (32-bit) score 10,425 vs 3,224 Around 3.2x better geekbench (32-bit) score
Significantly better 3DMark11 physics score 6,230 vs 2,400 More than 2.5x better 3DMark11 physics score
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,863 vs 1,004 More than 85% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better PassMark score 6,383 vs 2,989 Around 2.2x better PassMark score
Front view of AMD A8 5550M

Reasons to consider the
AMD A8 5550M

Report a correction
More l2 cache 4 MB vs 1 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 112.55W 4x lower typical power consumption
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Much higher Maximum Operating Temperature 105 °C vs 72.6 °C Around 45% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Marginally newer Mar, 2013 vs Jan, 2011 Release date over 2 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 41.29 $/year 4.9x lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 110.03 $/year 3.6x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better performance per watt 11.22 pt/W vs 6.23 pt/W More than 80% better performance per watt

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 2500K vs A8 5550M

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 2500K
10,425
A8 5550M
3,224

GeekBench

Core i5 2500K
13,624
A8 5550M
3,224

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

A8 5550M
2,400
Core i5 2500K A8 5550M @ community.futuremark.com

Passmark

A8 5550M
2,989
Core i5 2500K A8 5550M @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

A8 5550M
1,004

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 2500K  vs
A8 5550M 
Clock speed 3.3 GHz 2.1 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.7 GHz 3.1 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Is unlocked Yes No
Is hyperthreaded No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 95W 35W
Annual home energy cost 41.29 $/year 8.43 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 110.03 $/year 30.66 $/year
Performance per watt 6.23 pt/W 11.22 pt/W
Typical power consumption 112.55W 28.44W

details

Core i5 2500K  vs
A8 5550M 
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 1 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature 5 - 72.6°C Unknown - 105°C

gpu

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 3000 Radeon™ HD 8550G
Latest DirectX 10.1 11.0
Intel Core i5 2500K
Report a correction
AMD A8 5550M
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus