Intel Core i3-10110U vs Intel Core i7-2860QM Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-2860QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-10110U has 2 cores and 4 threads. The i7-2860QM doubles the core count and thread count of the i3-10110U.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Core i7-2860QM scores 3873 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 16.4% higher than the Core i3-10110U's score of 3236. The i7-2860QM wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23) by approximately 16.4% each time.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Core i3-10110U dominates in single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i3-10110U scores 162 versus 54 for the i7-2860QM, a 200% lead. In Geekbench single-core, the i3-10110U scores 1174 versus 558, a 110.4% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in Geekbench multi-core scores?

A: The Core i3-10110U scores 2143 in Geekbench multi-core, which is 27.5% higher than the Core i7-2860QM's 1681. This is a notable reversal from the Cinebench multi-core results where the i7-2860QM leads.

Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions on each chip?

A: The Core i3-10110U features UHD Graphics, while the Core i7-2860QM integrates Intel HD 3000. Both are mobile processors, but the i3-10110U uses the newer Comet Lake architecture with a 14 nm process node compared to the i7-2860QM's Sandy Bridge architecture on 32 nm.

Q: Which processor was released more recently?

A: The Core i3-10110U was released on 2019-08-20, while the Core i7-2860QM was released on 2011-09-03. The i3-10110U is roughly eight years newer in terms of release timing.

The Verdict

The recorded data paints a clear split-personality picture. The Core i7-2860QM wins 5 of the 8 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, taking every Cinebench multi-core test and two of the three Cinebench single-core tests. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration with 8 MB of shared L3 cache provides a genuine advantage in sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads. For users running Cinebench-style applications that scale with core count, the i7-2860QM is the stronger choice by a consistent margin of roughly 16.4%.

The Core i3-10110U wins only 3 of the 8 comparisons, but those wins are decisive and revealing. In Geekbench multi-core, the i3-10110U leads by 27.5%, and in Geekbench single-core it leads by 110.4%. The Cinebench R15 single-core result is even more lopsided: a 200% advantage for the i3-10110U. This suggests the newer Comet Lake architecture, with its higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus 3.60 GHz, delivers far superior per-clock and per-thread performance in latency-sensitive workloads.

The overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 1131 for the i3-10110U versus 1120 for the i7-2860QM. Both processors sit at the 32nd percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they land in the same performance tier overall. The nearest rivals for the i3-10110U include the Intel Processor N97 at an average score of 1132 and the Intel Pentium Gold G5500 at 1130, while the i7-2860QM sits near the AMD Athlon 240GE at 1121 and the Intel Xeon D-1518 at 1121.

For buyers who prioritize modern single-threaded responsiveness, daily computing, and efficiency, the Core i3-10110U is the clear pick. For users who need raw multi-threaded throughput in older rendering workloads, the Core i7-2860QM offers a measurable advantage. The decision hinges entirely on workload type: the i3-10110U excels in short-burst, latency-sensitive tasks, while the i7-2860QM grinds through parallel workloads with its extra cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The multi-core Cinebench results are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-2860QM scores 390 against 326 for the i3-10110U, a 16.4% lead. The same delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core: 1626 versus 1359, again 16.4%. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 3873 versus 3236, once more 16.4%. This uniformity suggests the i7-2860QM's extra cores and threads translate into a stable, predictable advantage across all three generations of the Cinebench renderer.

The Cinebench single-core results tell a more complex story. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i3-10110U posts 162 versus 54 for the i7-2860QM, a 200% lead. However, in Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-2860QM reverses course with 229 versus 191, a 16.6% advantage. The i7-2860QM also wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 546 versus 456, a 16.5% lead. The R15 single-core outlier for the i3-10110U is striking, but the two newer Cinebench single-core tests favor the older i7-2860QM.

Geekbench results favor the i3-10110U decisively. In Geekbench multi-core, the i3-10110U scores 2143 versus 1681, a 27.5% win. In Geekbench single-core, the i3-10110U scores 1174 versus 558, a 110.4% blowout. These results indicate that the i3-10110U's architecture handles the Geekbench workload much more efficiently, likely due to its higher boost clock and newer microarchitecture.

Across all 8 benchmarks, the i7-2860QM takes 5 wins and the i3-10110U takes 3. The margins tell the real story: the i7-2860QM's Cinebench wins are all clustered around 16.4% to 16.6%, while the i3-10110U's Geekbench wins range from 27.5% to 110.4%. The i3-10110U's victories are larger in magnitude, but they come in fewer tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every fundamental specification. The Core i3-10110U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the Core i7-2860QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: the i3-10110U runs at 2.10 GHz and boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the i7-2860QM runs at 2.50 GHz and boosts to 3.60 GHz. The i3-10110U has a higher boost clock by 0.50 GHz, but the i7-2860QM has a higher base clock by 0.40 GHz.

Thermal design power differs substantially: the i3-10110U is rated at 25 W, while the i7-2860QM is rated at 45 W. The i7-2860QM draws nearly double the power budget, which aligns with its higher core count. Socket compatibility is entirely different: the i3-10110U uses Intel BGA 1440, while the i7-2860QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B). These sockets are not interchangeable.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The i3-10110U has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7-2860QM also has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but doubles the L3 to 8 MB shared. Memory support differs: the i3-10110U supports DDR3 and DDR4, while the i7-2860QM's memory support field is not recorded, though it uses a dual-channel memory bus.

Integrated graphics differ: the i3-10110U carries UHD Graphics, while the i7-2860QM carries Intel HD 3000. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i7-2860QM has a recorded part number of SR02X, while the i3-10110U has no part number listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is generational. The Core i3-10110U is built on Comet Lake, specifically the Comet Lake-U variant, using a 14 nm process node. The Core i7-2860QM is built on Sandy Bridge, using a 32 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the 14 nm node is significantly denser and more power-efficient than the 32 nm node. The i7-2860QM has recorded transistor and die size data: 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i3-10110U has no recorded transistor count or die size.

The i3-10110U belongs to the Core 10th Gen series, while the i7-2860QM has no series designation. The i3-10110U's generation is listed as "Core i3 (Comet Lake-U)", while the i7-2860QM's generation is "Core i7 (Sandy Bridge)". Both are mobile-market segments, both are end-of-life products, and both are locked from multiplier adjustment.

The memory controller differs as well. The i3-10110U explicitly supports DDR3 and DDR4 memory types. The i7-2860QM's memory support is not listed, but it operates on a dual-channel memory bus. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The i3-10110U's newer architecture benefits from the more advanced Comet Lake memory controller, which likely contributes to its strong Geekbench performance.

The core count difference is the most impactful architectural distinction. The i7-2860QM's 4 cores and 8 threads give it a structural advantage in parallel workloads, which is why it consistently beats the i3-10110U in Cinebench multi-core tests. However, the i3-10110U's newer architecture and higher boost clock allow it to outperform the i7-2860QM in single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads, particularly in Geekbench tests. The 14 nm process node also enables the i3-10110U to deliver competitive performance at a 25 W TDP, compared to the i7-2860QM's 45 W TDP.