FX-9830P vs i7-2670QM

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-2670QM
2011
4 cores / 8 threads, 45 Watt
2.40
+12.1%
FX-9830P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.14

Core i7-2670QM outperforms FX-9830P by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking17831870
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency4.955.68
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date4 September 2011 (13 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$378no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed2.2 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier22no data
L1 cache256 KB320 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB (per module)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size216 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors1160 Million3,100 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCPGA988FP4
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection+-
Anti-Theft+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1066, DDR3-1333DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 3000AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes168

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.

i7-2670QM 2.40
+12.1%
FX-9830P 2.14

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.

i7-2670QM 3741
+12.3%
FX-9830P 3332

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.

i7-2670QM 463
FX-9830P 591
+27.6%

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.

i7-2670QM 1427
FX-9830P 1438
+0.8%

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.

i7-2670QM 3900
+28.6%
FX-9830P 3033

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.

i7-2670QM 14843
+51.1%
FX-9830P 9822

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.

i7-2670QM 10.56
FX-9830P 10.27
+2.8%

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.

i7-2670QM 5
+42.6%
FX-9830P 4

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

i7-2670QM 2.7
+35%
FX-9830P 2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.40 2.14
Integrated graphics card 0.66 1.95
Recency 4 September 2011 31 May 2016
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

i7-2670QM has a 12.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.

FX-9830P, on the other hand, has 195.5% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 28.6% lower power consumption.

The Core i7-2670QM is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-9830P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2670QM and FX-9830P, 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.


Intel Core i7-2670QM
Core i7-2670QM
AMD FX-9830P
FX-9830P

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.


4.1 768 votes

Rate Core i7-2670QM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 113 votes

Rate FX-9830P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-2670QM or FX-9830P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.