Intel Core i5-2405S Review

Introduction and Technical Specifications

Intel Core i5-2405S Review

Introduction

The latest in the LGA1155 line of CPUs is the i5-2405S. Whilst many processors get bigger and better with more speed, ever tinier nm processes etc, this is squarely aimed at the energy efficient, low-power end of the market.

With a TDP of only 65W and a clock speed of 2.5GHz this is either a serious attempt to lower the energy consumption of businesses or, like the famed 65W E6800, a potential powerhouse.

Let's find out which one it is shall we.

Technical Specifications

A quick glance through the specification table and we see that this is pretty much a standard Core i5 processor. We have four non-HT cores, a bit of Turbo performance boost, all very standard fare. 

The big change with the i5-2405S compared to, for example, the Core i5-2500K we use in our Sandy Bridge bench rig is the much tighter multiplier restrictions that limit overclocking potential and the obvious reduction from a TDP of 95W to 65W.

StatusLaunched
Launch DateQ2'11
Processor Numberi5-2405S
# of Cores4
# of Threads4
Clock Speed2.5 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency3.3 GHz
Bus/Core Ratio25
DMI5 GT/s
Instruction Set64-bit
Instruction Set ExtensionsSSE4.1/4.2, AVX
Embedded Options AvailableNo
Lithography32 nm
Max TDP65 W
Recommended Channel Price$205.00
# of Memory Channels2
Max Memory Bandwidth21 GB/s
ECC Memory SupportedNo
Processor GraphicsIntel® HD Graphics 3000
Graphics Base Frequency850 MHz
Graphics Max Dynamic Frequency1.1 GHz
Intel® Quick Sync VideoYes
Intel® InTru™ 3D Technology,Yes
Intel® Insider™Yes
Intel® Wireless DisplayNo
Intel® Flexible Display Interface (Intel® FDI)Yes
Intel® Clear Video HD TechnologyYes
Dual Display CapableYes
Max CPU Configuration1
TCASE69.1°C
Package Size37.5mm x 37.5mm
Sockets SupportedFCLGA1155, LGA1155
Low Halogen Options AvailableYes
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology2.0
Intel® vPro TechnologyNo
Intel® Hyper-Threading TechnologyNo
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x)Yes
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)No
Intel® Trusted Execution TechnologyNo
AES New InstructionsYes
Intel® 64Yes
Idle StatesYes
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® TechnologyYes
Thermal Monitoring TechnologiesYes
Intel® Fast Memory AccessYes
Intel® Flex Memory AccessYes
Execute Disable BitYes
«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next»

Most Recent Comments

31-08-2011, 06:02:33

tinytomlogan
The latest in a long line of SandyBridge processors is the low power Core i5-2405S. We put it to the test.



Continue Reading

31-08-2011, 06:17:02

SieB
Seems pretty pointless to release this when it offers nothing but a lower TDP and who would buy this when you can get the 2500k for the same money which you can also overclock

Even if you don't go for the 2500k the non K 2500 is still cheaper and faster than the 2405S.

31-08-2011, 07:24:06

sheroo
There's also the i5 2500T as well which is only 45W, but that's even more expensive than the 2500K.

31-08-2011, 20:45:59

badtaylorx
ok amd here is you chance.....hell i'll even write the slogan for you......."AMD's 980 BE--FASTER THAN THE LATEST I5!!!!!!!!!"

01-09-2011, 20:01:03

Speed
Quote:
Originally Posted by SieB View Post

Seems pretty pointless to release this when it offers nothing but a lower TDP and who would buy this when you can get the 2500k for the same money which you can also overclock

Even if you don't go for the 2500k the non K 2500 is still cheaper and faster than the 2405S.
I think it is aimed more at system builders than anything, lower TDP means less cooling, cheaper parts etc. They would buy in bulk and OEM which would result in cheaper prices than the 2500. Which I'm guessing why PC World was mentioned in the conclusion. Not everyone overclocks but you make a valid point.

02-09-2011, 05:04:08

Ya93sin
Would it not make a better HTPC solution?

But then the 2500K isn't a hot chip, and you get a fair bit more for the money. What would be interesting is if you can passively cool these things and get something truly silent.

02-09-2011, 16:04:29

shyguy094
I think low end AMD is more suitable for HTPCs. I got an mATX board that would do the same thing as an i3-2100 or i5-2405S rig can do. The Athlons are like $40 right now. It would be interesting to see if it's possible to passively cool the i5-2405S. That would be an advantage that the 2400S has. 45W to 65W CPUs can probably be cooled w/o a fan. My cousin's Dell Dimension 1100 was (Celeron D @ 2.53GHz).

02-09-2011, 17:25:04

Speed
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguy094 View Post

I think low end AMD is more suitable for HTPCs. I got an mATX board that would do the same thing as an i3-2100 or i5-2405S rig can do. The Athlons are like $40 right now. It would be interesting to see if it's possible to passively cool the i5-2405S. That would be an advantage that the 2400S has. 45W to 65W CPUs can probably be cooled w/o a fan. My cousin's Dell Dimension 1100 was (Celeron D @ 2.53GHz).
The onboard GPU though is very efficent, so that is another advantage unless you are talking about AMD APUs. I'm running a small form factor system on a 2100 @ 2560x1600 with no issues. I've also just built a HTPC for someone around the same CPU, they are ideally suited for HTPC applications. Maybe not as cheap as the AMD solutions, but they generally perform better in my experience. Obviously if you don't need the extra HP, then the AMD solution is fine.

02-09-2011, 19:18:45

shyguy094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed View Post

The onboard GPU though is very efficent, so that is another advantage unless you are talking about AMD APUs. I'm running a small form factor system on a 2100 @ 2560x1600 with no issues. I've also just built a HTPC for someone around the same CPU, they are ideally suited for HTPC applications. Maybe not as cheap as the AMD solutions, but they generally perform better in my experience. Obviously if you don't need the extra HP, then the AMD solution is fine.
You're right. AMD's APUs are great for a HTPC solution. I overclocked my HD4250 to 900MHz (880G chipset) and topped out at (an inconsistent) 40 FPS in BC2 on low settings. When the i3-2100 was 30% more than it is now, it had no real place in the market. It was too expensive for the "budget / HTPC people" and lacked 2 cores and an unlocked multiplier for the mainstream enthusiast. When I built my rig, I think the i3 was over $160 or $170. Pricecanada.com only has the NCIX bundle, so I can't check it now (pricecanada has pricing history). At the same time, the Phenom II X4 955 was about $125. AM3+ boards weren't available at the time (it was like early April), so I got a budget AM3 board.
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.