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 Pentium Gold 8500 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£140PassMark multi-core score:5949N. of physical cores:5CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1781TDP (Thermal design power):9 W

Intel Pentium Gold 8500 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.6/10

Overall score

Score
6.6/ 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–¼ Worse than 52% of models
Score components

40%

5.6

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

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–¼Worse than 52% of processors
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 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 65% of models
Score components

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

â–²Better than 65%
5.6

Technical score

Technical score
5.6/ 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–¼ Worse than 53% of models
Score components

60%

4.8

Performance

18%

6.5

Architecture

10%

6.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 53%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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~ £140
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 Pentium Gold 8500

Technical score
Technical score
5.6/ 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–¼ Worse than 53% of models
Score components:

60%

4.8

Performance

18%

6.5

Architecture

10%

6.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

5.6
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 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 65% of models
Score components:

70%

6.6

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

7.6
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
FCBGA1781
This processor uses the FCBGA1781 CPU socket, which is older than that of 72.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Chipset
Intel 300 Series
This processor supports Intel 300 Series chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 55% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
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
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 88.2% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
5
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 5 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.3% of processors and equal to 0.4% of processors.
CPU threads
6
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 6 CPU threads, which is fewer than 66.7% of processors and equal to 2.1% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
1x 1.0 GHz & 4x 0.7 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 1x1.0 GHz & 4x0.7 GHz which is lower than that of 95.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
5,949
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 5,949 in PassMark, which is lower than 67.8% 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
8 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is smaller than that of 50.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
L2 cache
3.3 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 3.3 MB which is larger than that of 53.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
L1 cache
464 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 464 KB which is larger than that of 60.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% 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 UHD Graphics 48EU
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 48EU integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 59.7% of processors and equal to that in 0.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
48
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 48 GPU execution units, which is more than 82.1% of processors and equal to 4.5% 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
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 82.1% of processors and equal to 3.1% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
9 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 9 W which is lower than that of 95.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
9 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 9 W which is lower than that of 95.4% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
29 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 29 W which is lower than that of 82.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% 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
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Pentium Gold 8500 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 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.
    E-core module: 2 MB shared
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 80% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • 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
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 54.7% lower boost power
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (29 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    29 W vs 64 W
  • 80% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, VAES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, VAES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 9.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,796 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,796 vs 2,558
  • 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.
    E-core module: 2 MB shared
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • 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
  • 2.4x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (11.9 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    11.9 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 2x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (48 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    48 vs 24
  • 80% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • 80% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • 54.7% lower boost power
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (29 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    29 W vs 64 W
  • 48.1% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (5,949 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    5,949 vs 11,469
  • 45.9% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (2,818 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    2,818 vs 5,209
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (1x1 GHz & 4x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    1x1.0 GHz & 4x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 38% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (210.9 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    210.89 vs 340.075
  • 1 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (5 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    5 vs 6
  • 2 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (6 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    6 vs 8
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1781 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1781 vs FP5
  • 48.1% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (5,949 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    5,949 vs 11,469
  • 45.9% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (2,818 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    2,818 vs 5,209
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (1x1 GHz & 4x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    1x1.0 GHz & 4x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (6 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    6 vs 8
  • 38% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (210.9 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    210.89 vs 340.075
  • 1 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (5 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    5 vs 6
  • 18 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (10 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    10 vs 28
  • 13.5% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.6 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.6 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 2 fewer PCIe lanes
    This processor has fewer PCIe lanes than the average processor (14 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    14 vs 16
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Pentium Gold 8500

  • Extreme energy efficiency with a low base power consumption of 9W, ideal for long battery life
  • Improved multitasking capabilities compared to older dual-core models thanks to 5 cores and 6 threads
  • Support for modern high-speed memory including DDR5-4800 and LPDDR5-5200
  • Integrates hardware features like Thread Director to optimize task management between performance and efficiency cores
  • Offers modern connectivity features such as PCI-Express Gen 4 and potential for WiFi 6E support

What customers don't like about Intel Pentium Gold 8500

  • Significant performance gap compared to Core i3 counterparts, estimated to be roughly 20% slower than the i3-1215U
  • Locked multiplier prevents any overclocking to boost performance
  • Struggles with heavy workloads or demanding modern games, often described as 'bottom of the barrel' for gaming
  • Integrated UHD graphics are limited with only 48 execution units, making it unsuitable for GPU-intensive tasks
  • Performance is highly dependent on the laptop's cooling solution and power limits set by manufacturers

Verdict

The Intel Pentium Gold 8500 is an entry-level mobile processor from the Alder Lake-U series, featuring a unique 5-core, 6-thread hybrid architecture composed of 1 Performance-core (up to 4.40 GHz) and 4 Efficient-cores (up to 3.30 GHz). Built on the 10nm Intel 7 process, it includes 8 MB of Intel Smart Cache, integrated UHD Graphics with 48 execution units, and supports modern standards like PCIe 4.0 and LPDDR5-5200 memory. Its main advantages include an exceptionally low base power of 9W (29W max turbo), which enables fanless designs in thin-and-light laptops, and improved efficiency for basic productivity tasks. However, it is limited by its single P-core, which restricts multi-threaded performance compared to the Core i3 series, and is unsuitable for heavy workloads like video editing or advanced gaming.

Compare Intel Pentium Gold 8500 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 Pentium Gold 8500 and other processors

No results found