Intel Core i3-1000NG4 vs Intel Core i7-860 Comparison

# Intel Core i7-860 vs Intel Core i3-1000NG4

The data presents a clear generational mismatch between two end-of-life Intel parts from different eras and market segments. The Core i7-860 (Nehalem, 45 nm, desktop, 2009) and Core i3-1000NG4 (Ice Lake, 10 nm, mobile, 2020) never meet in the same system, yet their benchmark results are remarkably close in aggregate. The i3-1000NG4 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas ranging from -13.9% to -14.1% (negative deltas indicating the i7 trails). The i7-860 posts an average benchmark score of 886 against the i3's 881, a difference of just 0.6%, placing both near the 24th and 23rd percentiles of all CPUs respectively. This near-parity in overall scoring masks a fundamental split: the i7's four-core, eight-thread layout favors threaded workloads, while the i3's newer architecture delivers superior single-core efficiency despite having half the cores.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Core i3-1000NG4 wins every Cinebench test in the dataset, from R15 multicore to R23 singlecore. The largest margin appears in R15 multicore, where the i3 scores 301 against the i7's 259, a 14% advantage. The R20 and R23 multicore tests show similar gaps, with the i3 leading 1255 to 1081 (13.9%) and 2989 to 2574 (13.9%) respectively. Single-core tests follow the same pattern, with the i3 ahead by 14.1% in R20 (177 vs 152) and 14% in R23 (422 vs 363).

Despite losing every benchmark, the i7-860's case rests on its core count. With four physical cores and eight threads, it offers parallel throughput that the i3's two cores and four threads cannot match in principle. However, the benchmark data does not support this theoretical advantage—the i3 wins even the multicore tests. The i7's only statistical claim to a win is its 886 average benchmark score, which edges the i3's 881 by 0.6%. That margin is smaller than the delta between the i7 and its nearest rival, the AMD PRO A8-8650B (887, delta -0.1%), meaning the i7 sits effectively at parity with a mid-range AMD desktop part from a later generation.

The i3's wins are consistent across every test iteration, suggesting architectural efficiency rather than workload-specific strengths. Its single-core scores (152, 177, 363 across R20 and R23) outpace the i7 (152 in R20, 363 in R23) by 14-16%, which is substantial for anyone running lightly threaded applications like older games or office productivity. The i7's multicore scores (259, 1081, 2574) fall short of the i3 (301, 1255, 2989) by the same 14% margin, meaning the i3's efficiency advantage fully offsets the i7's extra two cores.

Architecture Differences

The i7-860 uses the Nehalem architecture on the Lynnfield die, built on Intel's 45 nm process with 774 million transistors and a 296 mm² die size. The i3-1000NG4 uses the Ice Lake architecture on the Sunny Cove-Y die, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 123 mm² die size (transistor count not listed). This process shrink—from 45 nm to 10 nm—is the primary driver of the i3's efficiency gains, allowing it to deliver comparable or better performance at a 9 W TDP versus the i7's 95 W TDP, a difference of over 10x.

The core configurations differ sharply. The i7 has four cores and eight threads, while the i3 has two cores and four threads. Cache hierarchies also diverge: the i7 offers 64 KB L1 per core (vs 80 KB per core on the i3), 256 KB L2 per core (same on both), and 8 MB shared L3 (vs 4 MB shared on the i3). The i7's larger L3 cache is a legacy of its desktop positioning, but the i3's per-core L1 advantage (80 KB vs 64 KB) suggests a more modern cache design that better feeds its execution units.

Memory support reflects their respective eras. The i7 uses DDR3 memory on a dual-channel bus, while the i3 uses DDR4 on a dual-channel bus. Both lack ECC support. PCIe connectivity differs: the i7 provides Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i3 provides Gen 3 with no lane count specified. The i3 also integrates Iris Plus graphics with 48 execution units, whereas the i7 has no integrated graphics listed. Socket differences are complete: the i7 uses Intel Socket 1156, the i3 uses Intel BGA 1044, making them physically incompatible. The i7's part number is SLBJJ, the i3's is SRGM9.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a consistent 14% advantage for the i3-1000NG4 across all five Cinebench tests. In R15 multicore, the i3 scores 301 against the i7's 259, a delta of -14% (the negative sign indicating the i7 is behind). This test, which scales with core count, should favor the i7's four cores, yet the i3's two cores with higher per-thread performance overcome the deficit.

R20 multicore repeats the pattern: 1255 for the i3 versus 1081 for the i7, a 13.9% gap. R23 multicore shows 2989 versus 2574, again 13.9%. The consistency of these deltas—13.9% or 14% across every test—indicates that the i3's architectural advantage is uniform rather than workload-dependent. The i3's single-core scores are equally consistent: 177 vs 152 in R20 (14.1% delta) and 422 vs 363 in R23 (14% delta). The R15 single-core test was not run on the i7, so no comparison is available for that specific metric.

The i3's wins are not marginal. A 14% lead in both single- and multi-threaded tests means the i3 is simply faster at every task measured, regardless of thread count. The i7's only comparative strength is its average benchmark score of 886, which edges the i3's 881 by 5 points (0.6%). However, this aggregate metric includes the i7's R15 multicore score (259), which is its weakest relative showing. The i3's average is pulled down by its lack of an R15 single-core result, which would likely have boosted it further.

FAQ

Q: Does the Core i7-860 ever beat the Core i3-1000NG4 in any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i3-1000NG4 winning all five Cinebench tests (R15 multicore, R20 multicore and singlecore, R23 multicore and singlecore), with deltas ranging from -13.9% to -14.1% in the i7's favor (i.e., the i7 loses by 14%).

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-860 has an average benchmark score of 886, while the i3-1000NG4 scores 881, a difference of 5 points (0.6%). This puts the i7 at the 24th percentile of all CPUs and the i3 at the 23rd percentile.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The i7-860 has four cores and eight threads, while the i3-1000NG4 has two cores and four threads. Despite this, the i3 wins all multicore benchmarks by approximately 14%.

Q: What are the TDPs of these two processors?

A: The i7-860 has a TDP of 95 W, while the i3-1000NG4 has a TDP of 9 W. This is a 10x difference in power draw.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory type?

A: No. The i7-860 supports DDR3 memory, while the i3-1000NG4 supports DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, and neither supports ECC.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i3-1000NG4 has integrated graphics, specifically Iris Plus with 48 execution units. The i7-860 has no integrated graphics listed.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-860 | Intel Core i3-1000NG4 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base clock | 2.80 GHz | 1100.00 MHz |

| Boost clock | 3.47 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 9 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1156 | Intel BGA 1044 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Ice Lake |

| Codename | Lynnfield | Ice Lake-Y |

| Process node | 45 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 774 million | Not listed |

| Die size | 296 mm² | 123 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| PCIe | Gen 2, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3 |

| Integrated graphics | None | Iris Plus (48EU) |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2009-09-07 | 2020-03-17 |

| Part number | SLBJJ | SRGM9 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | No |

The Verdict

The benchmark data is decisive: the Intel Core i3-1000NG4 is the faster processor in every measured test, despite having half the cores and threads of the Core i7-860. A 14% lead in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests indicates that the i3's newer 10 nm Ice Lake architecture and higher per-core performance fully compensate for its lower core count. The i7's 95 W TDP versus the i3's 9 W TDP further underscores the i3's efficiency—it delivers more performance while consuming roughly one-tenth the power.

The i7-860's only statistical advantage is its 886 average benchmark score, which edges the i3's 881 by 0.6%. This aggregate metric, however, does not translate into a win in any individual test. The i7's four cores and 8 MB of L3 cache suggest it might handle heavily threaded workloads better, but the data shows the i3 winning even the multicore tests. For anyone choosing between these two, the i3-1000NG4 is the clear pick on performance. The i7-860's claim to relevance rests solely on its desktop socket (Socket 1156) and the theoretical scalability of its extra cores, which the benchmark results do not support. The i3-1000NG4, as a mobile part with integrated Iris Plus graphics and Gen 3 PCIe, offers a more modern feature set to complement its superior benchmark scores.

Neither CPU ranks highly overall—both sit in the low 20s percentiles of all CPUs—so these are not high-performance parts by modern standards. But within this comparison, the i3-1000NG4 is the decisive winner on every measured metric. The i7-860, despite its age and higher power draw, manages to stay within 14% of the i3 in all tests, which reflects the value of its additional cores in narrowing the gap. However, closing a 14% gap is not winning, and the data shows no scenario where the i7-860 comes out ahead.