Intel Core i3-7100H vs Intel Core i7-2630QM Comparison

The Intel Core i3-7100H and Intel Core i7-2630QM are two mobile processors from different eras, and the benchmark data shows that the older i7-2630QM holds a consistent, though narrow, lead across every single test. The i7-2630QM wins all five head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with margins ranging from 2.8% to 3%. Despite the i3-7100H being built on a much newer process node and featuring a higher base clock, the i7-2630QM’s additional two physical cores and four threads give it the edge in multi-threaded workloads, and it even edges ahead in single-core tests. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical—1009 for the i3-7100H versus 1005 for the i7-2630QM—placing both in the 27th and 28th percentiles of all CPUs, respectively. This is a matchup where architectural age is less important than core count.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if narrow, winner: the Intel Core i7-2630QM. It wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, from Cinebench R15 multicore (304 vs. 295) to Cinebench R23 single-core (426 vs. 414). The i7-2630QM’s advantage is consistent, but it is not dramatic—the largest delta is only 3% in Cinebench R15 multicore, and most other tests show a 2.8% to 2.9% lead. For users who prioritize raw multi-threaded performance, the i7-2630QM is the better choice, as its 4 cores and 8 threads outmuscle the i3-7100H’s 2 cores and 4 threads in every rendering workload tested.

However, the i3-7100H is not without merit. It is a much more modern part, built on a 14 nm process versus the i7-2630QM’s 32 nm, and it has a significantly higher base clock of 2.80 GHz compared to the i7-2630QM’s 2.00 GHz base (which boosts to 2.90 GHz). The i3-7100H also supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, while the i7-2630QM’s memory support is unspecified in the data. For users who value efficiency and modern platform features over a marginal performance lead, the i3-7100H could be the more practical selection, but strictly from a performance standpoint, the i7-2630QM is the superior processor.

The percentile rankings reinforce this: the i7-2630QM sits at the 27th percentile, just one point below the i3-7100H’s 28th percentile, but the head-to-head results show the i7-2630QM winning every test. The i3-7100H’s nearest rivals include the Intel Processor N100 (average score 1007, delta 0.2%) and the Intel Core i5-10210Y (average score 1006, delta 0.3%), while the i7-2630QM is closest to the Intel Core i7-5600U (average score 1005, delta 0%) and the AMD FX-9830P (average score 1006, delta -0.1%). These rival comparisons show that both processors are tightly clustered in the mid-range of mobile performance, but the i7-2630QM’s consistent head-to-head wins make it the pick for anyone running heavily threaded applications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The Intel Core i3-7100H is based on the Kaby Lake architecture, specifically the Kaby Lake-H variant, and is built on Intel’s 14 nm process node. It features 2 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and no boost clock listed. The die size is 126 mm², and it has a 3 MB shared L3 cache. Its integrated graphics are the Intel HD Graphics 630, and it uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket. The i3-7100H supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and its PCIe interface is Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). It was released in January 2017 with a launch MSRP of $225.

The Intel Core i7-2630QM, by contrast, is a Sandy Bridge part built on Intel’s 32 nm process. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 2.90 GHz. The die size is significantly larger at 216 mm², and it contains 1,160 million transistors. Its L3 cache is 6 MB shared, double that of the i3-7100H. The integrated graphics are the older Intel HD 3000, and it uses the Intel Socket G2 (988B). The i7-2630QM does not have memory support or PCIe specifications listed in the data. Its transistor count is notably high for its era, and it was released in January 2011.

The core count difference is the most critical architectural divergence: the i7-2630QM has twice as many physical cores and threads as the i3-7100H. This directly explains its multi-core benchmark wins. The i3-7100H compensates with a much higher base clock (2.80 GHz vs. 2000.00 MHz) and a more efficient process node, but its smaller L3 cache (3 MB vs. 6 MB) and lack of boost capability limit its ability to close the gap. Both processors are end-of-life and have locked multipliers, so no overclocking is possible.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results show a complete sweep for the Intel Core i7-2630QM, but the margins reveal where each processor is strongest. The i7-2630QM wins all five head-to-head tests, with its largest advantage in Cinebench R15 multicore, where it scores 304 versus the i3-7100H’s 295, a 3% delta. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the i7-2630QM scores 1268 against 1231, a 2.9% lead. The single-core tests are closer: Cinebench R20 single-core shows 178 versus 173 (2.8% delta), and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 426 versus 414 (2.8% delta). The i7-2630QM’s multi-core advantage is slightly larger than its single-core advantage, which aligns with its additional cores.

For users running heavily threaded workloads like video rendering or 3D modeling, the i7-2630QM is the clear winner. Its 8 threads provide a measurable benefit in Cinebench R23 multicore, where it scores 3020 versus the i3-7100H’s 2932. For single-threaded tasks, the i7-2630QM also wins, but the margin is small enough that real-world differences would be barely perceptible. The i3-7100H’s higher base clock of 2.80 GHz does not translate into a win in any test, as the i7-2630QM’s boost clock of 2.90 GHz appears to be sufficient to overcome the clock deficit.

The i3-7100H’s strengths are not evident in the benchmark data, but its architectural advantages—the 14 nm process and dual memory support—suggest it could be more efficient and better suited for modern memory configurations. However, in terms of pure compute performance, the i7-2630QM wins everywhere. The i3-7100H does have a better integrated GPU (Intel HD Graphics 630 versus Intel HD 3000), which could matter for light gaming or media playback, but no graphics benchmarks are provided in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher core count?

A: The Intel Core i7-2630QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-7100H has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the performance gap in multi-core benchmarks?

A: The i7-2630QM leads by 2.9% in Cinebench R20 multicore (1268 vs. 1231) and by 2.9% in Cinebench R23 multicore (3020 vs. 2932).

Q: Does the newer i3-7100H win any benchmarks?

A: No, the data shows the i7-2630QM wins all five head-to-head tests, including single-core tests where the margin is 2.8%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i3-7100H has an average benchmark score of 1009, while the i7-2630QM has an average score of 1005, a difference of 0.4%.

Q: What are the architectural differences in process node?

A: The i3-7100H is built on a 14 nm process, while the i7-2630QM uses a 32 nm process.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i7-2630QM has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 3 MB found in the i3-7100H.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are a clean sweep for the Intel Core i7-2630QM, with the largest margin appearing in Cinebench R15 multicore. There, the i7-2630QM scores 304 against the i3-7100H’s 295, a delta of 3%. This is the single biggest gap in the entire comparison, and it highlights the benefit of the i7-2630QM’s two extra physical cores. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the lead narrows slightly to 2.9%, with the i7-2630QM scoring 1268 versus 1231. The Cinebench R23 multicore test shows a similar 2.9% delta, with scores of 3020 and 2932, respectively.

The single-core results are even tighter. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i7-2630QM scores 178, just 5 points ahead of the i3-7100H’s 173, a 2.8% delta. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows the same 2.8% margin, with the i7-2630QM scoring 426 and the i3-7100H scoring 414. These single-core margins are consistent, suggesting that the i7-2630QM’s boost clock of 2.90 GHz provides a modest but reliable advantage over the i3-7100H’s fixed 2.80 GHz clock. The i3-7100H does not have a boost clock listed, which likely explains why it cannot match the i7-2630QM even in single-threaded tasks.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The i3-7100H has an average score of 1009, while the i7-2630QM sits at 1005, meaning the i3-7100H is technically 0.4% higher on average. However, this average includes only the Cinebench tests for the i3-7100H, while the i7-2630QM also includes Geekbench scores (1393 multicore and 445 single-core), which are not part of the head-to-head set. The percentile rankings are nearly identical—28th for the i3-7100H and 27th for the i7-2630QM—placing both processors in the bottom third of all CPUs. The nearest rivals for the i3-7100H include the Intel Core i7-2675QM (average score 1012, delta -0.3%) and the Intel Xeon W5580 (average score 1012, delta -0.3%), while the i7-2630QM is closest to the Intel Core i7-880 (average score 1006, delta -0.1%). These rival comparisons confirm that both processors are competitive with a broad range of older and lower-end modern parts, but the i7-2630QM’s consistent head-to-head wins make it the stronger performer in this direct matchup.