Core i3-4158U vs Core i5-520UM

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-4158U vs Core i5-520UM FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-4158U vs Core i5-520UM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-4158U

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,921 vs 1,943).
❌2744.4% higher power demand at 512W vs 18W.

Core i5-520UM

2010

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 18W instead of 512W, a 494W reduction.
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 12) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-520UM better than Core i3-4158U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i3-4158U is ahead with a 0.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-520UM pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-520UM is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i5-520UM still makes the most sense overall. Core i5-520UM comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-4158U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4158U vs Core i5-520UM Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-4158U

The Core i3-4158U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,921 points. Launch price was $315.

Core i5-520UM

The Core i5-520UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.07 GHz, with boost up to 1.87 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,943 points. Launch price was $241.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-4158U and Core i5-520UM share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Core i3-4158U versus 1.87 GHz on the Core i5-520UM — a 6.7% clock advantage for the Core i3-4158U (base: 2 GHz vs 1.07 GHz). The Core i3-4158U uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i5-520UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4158U scores 1,921 against the Core i5-520UM's 1,943 — a 1.1% lead for the Core i5-520UM. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-4158U vs 3 MB on the Core i5-520UM.

Feature	Core i3-4158U	Core i5-520UM
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2 GHz+7%	1.87 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz+87%	1.07 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	3 MB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,921	1,943+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	457	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4158U uses the FCBGA1168 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-520UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4158U versus 800 on the Core i5-520UM — the Core i3-4158U supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-4158U supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 12 (Core i3-4158U) vs 16 (Core i5-520UM) — the Core i5-520UM offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM86,HM87 (Core i3-4158U) and HM55,HM57,QM57,QS57 (Core i5-520UM).

Feature	Core i3-4158U	Core i5-520UM
Socket	FCBGA1168	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600+100%	800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	12	16+33%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x / VT-d / EPT (Core i3-4158U) vs true (Core i5-520UM). Both include integrated graphics — Intel Iris Graphics 5100 (Core i3-4158U) and Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake) (Core i5-520UM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4158U targets Multimedia. Direct competitor: Core i5-520UM rivals Core 2 Duo SU9400.

Feature	Core i3-4158U	Core i5-520UM
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel Iris Graphics 5100	Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x / VT-d / EPT	true
Target Use	Multimedia	—