i7-2637M vs A10-9620P

VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-9620P
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.66
+37.2%

A10-9620P outperforms Core i7-2637M by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20882354
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesBristol RidgeIntel Core i7
Power efficiency10.096.49
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date1 January 2017 (7 years ago)3 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Detailed specifications

A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.5 GHz1.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rateno data4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data17
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache2 MB512 KB
L3 cacheno data4 MB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size250 mm2149 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million624 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFP4FCBGA1023
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theftno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333
Maximum memory sizeno data8.01 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)Intel HD Graphics 3000
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.2 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A10-9620P 1.66
+37.2%
i7-2637M 1.21

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A10-9620P 2535
+36.7%
i7-2637M 1854

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A10-9620P 503
+13%
i7-2637M 445

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A10-9620P 1115
+15.2%
i7-2637M 968

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

A10-9620P 2277
i7-2637M 3600
+58.1%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

A10-9620P 7420
+4.9%
i7-2637M 7074

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

A10-9620P 14.41
+50.6%
i7-2637M 21.7

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

A10-9620P 3
+19.3%
i7-2637M 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

A10-9620P 230
+14.4%
i7-2637M 201

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

A10-9620P 72
i7-2637M 93
+29.2%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

A10-9620P 0.81
i7-2637M 1.09
+34.6%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

A10-9620P 16
+34.7%
i7-2637M 12

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

A10-9620P 77
+10.2%
i7-2637M 70

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

A10-9620P 1329
i7-2637M 2325
+74.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.66 1.21
Integrated graphics card 2.43 0.66
Recency 1 January 2017 3 January 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 17 Watt

A10-9620P has a 37.2% higher aggregate performance score, 268.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 13.3% lower power consumption.

The A10-9620P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-2637M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-9620P and Core i7-2637M, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A10-9620P
A10-9620P
Intel Core i7-2637M
Core i7-2637M

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 312 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 13 votes

Rate Core i7-2637M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-9620P or Core i7-2637M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.