CPU Comparison
Intel Core i5-2405S vs Intel Core i5-2500S
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i5-2405S is a specialized 65W quad-core processor that distinguishes itself from the i5-2400S through its integrated graphics. While sharing the same 2.5 GHz base clock and 3.3 GHz turbo boost, Intel equipped this chip with the Intel HD 3000 graphics processor instead of the HD 2000. The HD 3000 features 12 Execution Units, doubling the graphics rendering capabilities. This made the i5-2405S an ideal choice for small form factor business PCs that required slightly better graphical throughput for entry-level 3D applications or dual-display setups without adding a dedicated GPU.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
CPU performance is identical to the i5-2400S, adequate for legacy apps.
Handles legacy office workloads well, but sustained multi-core loads cause it to throttle below standard i5-2500 speeds.
Gaming
HD 3000 can handle very old games, but nothing modern.
Intel HD 2000 graphics prevent any meaningful modern gaming experience.
Virtualization
VM performance is constrained by the 4-thread limit.
Good enterprise virtualization feature support, but limited by four total threads.
Efficiency
Excellent power metrics for a quad-core chip of its era.
Excellent efficiency for 2011, drawing significantly less power at idle and light loads than 95 W parts.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No AI acceleration capabilities
- No AI acceleration capabilities
- AVX support exists but lacks AVX2 for modern workloads
- Far too slow for practical AI tasks
Content Creation
Gaming
- HD 3000 is noticeably faster than HD 2000 in legacy titles
- Still lacks DirectX 12 support
- Not viable for 3D gaming past 2012 standards
- Intel HD 2000 is a severe bottleneck for 3D rendering
- Can handle older 2D or very light 3D indie games
- Requires a discrete GPU for any acceptable gaming experience
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics
- Quick Sync Video support
- Low 65W power draw
- Full 6 MB L3 cache
Cons
- Rare and potentially expensive on the used market
- No Hyper-Threading
- Lower clocks than standard 95W parts
- Lacks AVX2
- Not Windows 11 compatible
Pros
- Matches the 3.7 GHz turbo of the standard 95 W i5-2500
- 65 W TDP allows for much quieter, smaller cooling solutions
- Full enterprise feature set including TXT and VT-d
- Lower idle power consumption than standard desktop parts
- Reliable Sandy Bridge architecture
Cons
- Lower sustained multi-core clocks due to 65 W limit
- Intel HD 2000 graphics are very weak
- Locked multiplier
- No Hyper-Threading
- Obsolete platform with no upgrade path
Competitors & Alternatives
Intel Core i5-2405S
- AMD A8-3850Rival
Desktop APU
- AMD A6-3670Rival
Desktop APU
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5-2400SRival
Desktop
- Intel Core i3-2125Rival
Desktop
- AMD Phenom II X4 860TRival
Desktop
Better CPU clocks and better graphics within the same 65W TDP.
Compare head-to-head- AMD A10-5700Alt
Newer APU platform with significantly better graphics.
- Intel Core i7-2600SAlt
Adds Hyper-Threading for better multi-tasking.
- Intel Xeon E3-1245Alt
Similar HD 3000 graphics but in an 80W standard-power package.
Intel Core i5-2500S
- AMD Phenom II X4 840TRival
Low Power Desktop
- AMD A8-3820Rival
Desktop APU
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5-2400SRival
Low Power Desktop
- AMD A6-3670Rival
Budget Desktop
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5-2500TRival
Ultra Low Power Desktop
If your SFF chassis can handle 95 W, the standard 2500 offers better sustained performance for less money.
Compare head-to-headIvy Bridge successor with better integrated graphics and slightly improved efficiency.
Compare head-to-head- Intel Core i7-2600SAlt
Adds Hyper-Threading (8 threads) for better multi-tasking within the same 65 W power envelope.
Our Verdict on Each
A niche OEM processor that offered better integrated graphics in a low-power package, now mostly useful for exact-match legacy repairs.
Best for: Replacing a failed CPU in a 2011 Apple iMac or premium AIO
Read the full reviewA highly effective power-optimized Sandy Bridge chip that delivered excellent burst performance for its 65 W TDP, though entirely outclassed today.
Best for: Replacing a failed CPU in a proprietary Small Form Factor PC that strictly requires a 65 W or lower processor.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is faster for gaming, Intel Core i5-2405S or Intel Core i5-2500S?
For gaming, the Intel Core i5-2405S leads with a gaming performance score of 18/100 among Intel Core i5-2405S and Intel Core i5-2500S.
Do Intel Core i5-2405S and Intel Core i5-2500S use the same socket?
Yes — all of these CPUs use the LGA 1155 socket, so they share compatible motherboards.
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The Intel Core i5-2500S posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core i5-2405S (2,400), Intel Core i5-2500S (3,800). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.