OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i7-1265U review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£360PassMark multi-core score:13158N. of physical cores:10CPU boost clock speed:4.8 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1744TDP (Thermal design power):15 W

Intel Core i7-1265U Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 4 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 71% of models
Score components

40%

6.9

Technical score

25%

7.9

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 71% of processors
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 71% of models
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

8.6

Price

â–²Better than 71%
6.9

Technical score

Technical score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 67% of models
Score components

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

8.0

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 67%
7.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 66% of models

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

8.0

Popularity

Grades by review (4)
4 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 66%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £360
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i7-1265U

Technical score
Technical score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 67% of models
Score components:

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

8.0

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated graphics

6.9
Reviews score
7.9
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 71% of models
Score components:

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

8.6

Price

7.7
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1744
This processor uses the FCBGA1744 CPU socket, which is older than that of 73.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, VAES, BMI2
This processor supports MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, VAES, BMI2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 74% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
10
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 10 CPU cores, which is more than 75.2% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.8 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.8 GHz which is higher than that of 69.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.8 GHz & 8x 1.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.8 GHz & 8x1.3 GHz which is lower than that of 52.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
13,158
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 13,158 in PassMark, which is higher than 53.9% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
12 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
L2 cache
9.5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 9.5 MB which is larger than that of 77.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
L1 cache
928 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 928 KB which is larger than that of 82.9% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5, which is newer than that of 95.9% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 70.6% of processors and equal to 6.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5-5200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5-5200 MHz, which is higher than that of 69.1% of processors and equal to 1.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
This processor uses the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 81% of processors and equal to that in 2.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
96
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 96 GPU execution units, which is more than 94.8% of processors and equal to 4.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
15 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 15 W which is lower than that of 79.2% of processors and equal to that of 15.1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
15 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 15 W which is lower than that of 78.3% of processors and equal to that of 15.6% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
55 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 55 W which is lower than that of 59.7% of processors and equal to that of 6.3% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 12 W
Show more

Intel Core i7-1265U vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.89x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (8,108 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    8,108 vs 2,804.5
  • 4 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.17x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (9.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    9.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 17.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.9/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 66% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (4)
    4 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.9 vs 6.7
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
    AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 2.89x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (8,108 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    8,108 vs 2,804.5
  • 4 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • 9.1% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 22% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,122 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,122 vs 2,558
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 23.6% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,898 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,898 vs 1,535
  • 18.8% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (6,186 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    6,186 vs 5,209
  • 2 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    6 vs 4
  • 14.7% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (13,158 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    13,158 vs 11,469
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.17x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (9.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    9.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • 2.42x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (928 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    928 KB vs 384 KB
  • 53.7% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (82 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    82 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 62.5% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 63.8% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5-5200 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5-5,200 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 4x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (96 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    96 vs 24
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 66.7% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 66.7% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 35.1% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, VAES, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, VAES, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP5
  • 44% more expensive
    Intel Core i7-1265U is more expensive than the average processor (£360 vs £250).
    £360 vs £250
  • 10 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (18 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    18 vs 28
  • 44% more expensive
    Intel Core i7-1265U is more expensive than the average processor (£360 vs £250).
    £360 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, VAES, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, VAES, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP5
  • 10 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (18 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    18 vs 28
  • 35.1% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.9
notebookcheck.net
✓ explicit
22/07/2022
Lab test · Business laptop
Verdict
Intel Core i7-1265U in the Dell Latitude 13 7330 handles office work well in a 1 kg chassis, though the Framework 13.5 with i7-1260P edges ahead in several tests.
7.0
pcworld.com
✓ explicit
16/01/2023
Hands-on review · Business 2-in-1
Verdict
Intel Core i7-1265U in the HP Dragonfly Folio G3 is a quiet, cool business 2-in-1 with a great keyboard, but battery life lags behind rivals.
7.0
notebookcheck.biz
≈ estimated
17/01/2023
Lab test · Power limit comparison
Verdict
Intel Core i7-1265U holds its own at 15 to 20 watts, but needs close to 50 watts to match AMD's 25-watt U-series chips in multi-core tests.
9.0
notebookcheck.nl
✓ explicit
15/12/2022
Lab test · Business ultrabook
Verdict
Intel Core i7-1265U in the ThinkPad X1 Carbon G10 pulls ahead of the i5-1250P model, mainly in PCMark 10 content creation tests.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i7-1265U

  • Excellent single-threaded performance for daily office tasks and productivity
  • Highly portable and efficient, ideal for thin and light ultrabooks
  • Support for modern connectivity including Thunderbolt 4, Wi-Fi 6E, and PCIe 4.0
  • Integrated Iris Xe graphics (96EU) allow for moderate gaming at low settings
  • Features 'Enterprise' vPro management, making it suitable for corporate business environments

What customers don't like about Intel Core i7-1265U

  • Sustained performance is often limited by its 15W TDP and thermal throttling in compact laptop chassis
  • Multi-threaded performance is frequently outperformed by competing Ryzen processors
  • Reports of significant heating issues and power consumption spikes during intensive workloads
  • Battery life can be underwhelming compared to newer architectures like the Apple M-series or Intel's own 13th/14th Gen chips
  • The 2 Performance cores can be a bottleneck for heavy multi-tasking compared to P-series or H-series processors

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-1265U is a high-end mobile processor from the 12th Gen Alder Lake-U series, featuring a hybrid architecture with 10 cores (2 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores) and 12 threads. It operates at a base power of 15W with a max turbo frequency of 4.80 GHz and includes 12 MB of Intel Smart Cache. Key advantages include its Enterprise vPro management features, integrated Intel Iris Xe graphics (96 EUs) reaching 1.25 GHz, and support for modern memory types like DDR5-4800 and LPDDR5-5200. However, its performance is often limited by its low thermal design power (TDP), which can lead to thermal throttling and lower sustained speeds during long, heavy workloads compared to higher-wattage P-series or H-series chips.

Compare Intel Core i7-1265U with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i7-1265U and other processors

No results found