Intel Core i3-4370 vs Intel Core i7-2860QM Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The Intel Core i3-4370 records an average benchmark score of 1130, while the Intel Core i7-2860QM records 1120. The i3-4370 sits slightly higher, though both occupy the 32nd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the newer Haswell architecture give the i3-4370 a single-core advantage?

A: No. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7-2860QM scores 546 versus 463 for the i3-4370, a 15.2% difference. The older Sandy Bridge part wins every single-core test in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ between these two chips?

A: The i3-4370 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-2860QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. The i7 doubles both counts, which directly explains its multi-core wins.

Q: Which processor has a larger shared L3 cache?

A: The i7-2860QM has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, exactly double the 4 MB found on the i3-4370. Both chips use 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Neither the i3-4370 nor the i7-2860QM has an unlocked multiplier. Both are locked parts, so the recorded base and boost clocks are the maximum operational frequencies.

Q: Which chip has the higher base clock speed?

A: The i3-4370 runs at 3.80 GHz base, significantly higher than the i7-2860QM's 2.50 GHz base. However, the i7-2860QM has a 3.60 GHz boost clock, while the i3-4370 has no boost clock at all.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-4370 belongs to the Haswell generation, built on Intel's 22 nm process node. The die measures 177 mm² and contains 1,400 million transistors. It uses the Intel Socket 1150 platform and is classified as a desktop part. The i7-2860QM comes from the older Sandy Bridge generation, fabricated on a 32 nm process. Its die is larger at 216 mm² but contains fewer transistors at 1,160 million. The i7 uses the Intel Socket G2 (988B) and is a mobile-class processor.

The cache hierarchy reveals a fundamental design split. Both processors allocate 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 differs: the i3-4370 has 4 MB, while the i7-2860QM has 8 MB. This doubling of L3 gives the mobile chip a substantial on-die storage advantage for workloads that reuse data across cores.

Integrated graphics also differ by generation. The i3-4370 pairs with Intel HD 4600, while the i7-2860QM carries Intel HD 3000. The Haswell part's newer iGPU offers more modern media features, though the database does not record graphics benchmarks for either chip.

Memory support shows a contrast in documentation. The i3-4370 explicitly supports DDR3 with a dual-channel memory bus. The i7-2860QM's memory support field is not recorded, but it also uses a dual-channel memory bus. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The i3-4370 supports PCIe Gen 3, while the i7-2860QM has no PCIe generation recorded. The i7's production status is listed as end-of-life, while the i3-4370's status is not specified. The i7's part number is SR02X.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Core i7-2860QM across all five recorded comparisons. The i3-4370 fails to win a single test, with the i7 taking five victories.

The largest margin appears in Cinebench R15 multicore. The i7-2860QM scores 390 against the i3-4370's 330, a delta of 15.4%. This is the widest gap in the comparison set. The multicore advantage persists across newer Cinebench versions: in R20 multicore, the i7 scores 1626 versus 1379 (15.2% ahead), and in R23 multicore, it scores 3873 versus 3284 (15.2% ahead).

Single-core results show the same pattern, though the i7's edge is slightly narrower. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-2860QM scores 229 against 194 for the i3-4370, a 15.3% difference. In R23 single-core, the i7 scores 546 versus 463, a 15.2% lead.

The consistency is striking. Every delta in the head-to-head table falls between 15.2% and 15.4%, regardless of the test version or core count. This suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent. The i7's 4-core, 8-thread design combined with its 3.60 GHz boost clock delivers a uniform advantage over the i3's 2-core, 4-thread configuration at 3.80 GHz fixed.

Notably, the i7-2860QM also has recorded Geekbench scores that are not part of the head-to-head table: 1681 in multicore and 558 in single-core. The i3-4370 has no Geekbench entries in the database, so no direct comparison is possible for that suite.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The i3-4370 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-2860QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks stand at 3.80 GHz for the i3 and 2.50 GHz for the i7, a 1.30 GHz gap. The i7 adds a 3.60 GHz boost clock; the i3 has no boost clock recorded.

Thermal design power favors the mobile chip. The i7-2860QM is rated at 45 watts, while the i3-4370 is rated at 54 watts. Despite having twice the cores, the i7 draws less power under its TDP rating, a benefit of its lower base frequency.

Process technology differs by a full node generation. The i3-4370 uses 22 nm, while the i7-2860QM uses 32 nm. Transistor counts are 1,400 million for the i3 and 1,160 million for the i7. Die sizes are 177 mm² for the i3 and 216 mm² for the i7, meaning the older process packs fewer transistors into a larger area.

Socket compatibility is entirely separate. The i3-4370 fits Intel Socket 1150, a desktop platform. The i7-2860QM fits Intel Socket G2 (988B), a mobile socket. The market segments confirm this split: desktop for the i3, mobile for the i7.

Cache totals diverge at the L3 level. Both share 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the i7's 8 MB L3 doubles the i3's 4 MB. Integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 4600 for the i3-4370 versus Intel HD 3000 for the i7-2860QM.

Release dates are nearly three years apart. The i7-2860QM launched on 2011-09-03, while the i3-4370 launched on 2014-07-20. The i7 is marked end-of-life; the i3's production status is unrecorded. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Core i7-2860QM wins in every benchmark category where both have scores. It takes all five head-to-head tests, covering both single-core and multicore workloads across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The i7 also holds Geekbench scores of 1681 multicore and 558 single-core, which the i3 cannot match for lack of entries.

The i3-4370's advantages are not measured in raw performance but in platform and efficiency characteristics. Its 22 nm process gives it a smaller die (177 mm² versus 216 mm²), and its 54 watt TDP, while higher than the i7's 45 watts, comes with a much higher base clock of 3.80 GHz. For desktop users with a Socket 1150 motherboard, the i3 offers a simpler, fixed-clock experience with no boost variability.

The i7-2860QM wins where thread parallelism matters. Its 8 threads and 8 MB L3 cache make it the stronger choice for multi-threaded rendering workloads, as shown by its 3873 R23 multicore score versus 3284 for the i3. It also wins single-threaded tests despite its lower base clock, thanks to the 3.60 GHz boost clock that the i3 lacks entirely.

The i3-4370 finds its niche in scenarios where a higher sustained base clock is preferable to burst performance. Its 3.80 GHz fixed frequency avoids any boost-dependent variability. The i7-2860QM, by contrast, relies on boost to reach 3.60 GHz from a 2.50 GHz base, which could matter for workloads that run at sustained full load.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the Intel Core i7-2860QM for raw performance. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by a consistent margin of roughly 15%, and its 4-core, 8-thread design doubles the i3-4370's core and thread counts. The 8 MB L3 cache provides additional headroom for data-heavy workloads. The i7's 45 watt TDP is also lower than the i3's 54 watts, making it the more power-efficient choice despite its older 32 nm process.

The i3-4370's case rests on platform modernity and clock stability. It uses the newer Haswell architecture on 22 nm, supports PCIe Gen 3, and runs at a flat 3.80 GHz with no boost behavior. Its 4 MB L3 and 2 cores are modest, but for a desktop system on Socket 1150, it offers a straightforward, locked-clock solution. The i7-2860QM requires a mobile socket and is end-of-life, which limits its practical availability.

For users choosing between these two based on benchmark results alone, the i7-2860QM is the clear pick. Its 15.2% to 15.4% lead across all Cinebench versions shows no weakness in either single-core or multi-core tasks. The i3-4370's 32nd percentile ranking matches the i7's, but the average benchmark score of 1130 versus 1120 reflects a near-tie in aggregate, masking the i7's consistent head-to-head superiority.

The verdict is straightforward: the i7-2860QM wins on performance, threads, and cache. The i3-4370 wins on process node, socket modernity, and fixed high base clock. Buyers on a 1150 desktop platform should favor the i3 for its newer features, while anyone who can accommodate the mobile socket should take the i7 for its decisive benchmark superiority.