CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-7100H and Intel Core i7-880 represent two distinct eras of Intel processor design, separated by nearly seven years of architectural evolution. The i3-7100H is a 14 nm Kaby Lake-H mobile chip with 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-880 is a 45 nm Nehalem desktop part with 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite the i7-880’s core and thread advantage, benchmark data shows the newer i3-7100H edges out the older flagship in every single tested workload, albeit by extremely narrow margins. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the i3-7100H at 1009 and the i7-880 at 1006, placing them at the 28th and 27th percentiles of all CPUs respectively.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-880 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-7100H has 2 cores and 4 threads. The i7-880 offers double the physical cores and double the thread count.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core performance?

A: The i3-7100H wins all three multi-core benchmarks, but by razor-thin margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-7100H scores 295 versus the i7-880's 294, a 0.3% difference. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the scores are 1231 and 1227, again a 0.3% lead for the i3-7100H. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows 2932 versus 2923, still a 0.3% advantage.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the i7-880 wins?

A: No. According to the head-to-head data, the i3-7100H wins 5 benchmarks and the i7-880 wins 0. The single-core tests are essentially ties, with the i3-7100H taking a 0% delta in Cinebench R20 single-core (both score 173) and a 0.5% delta in R23 single-core (414 vs 412).

Q: What are the manufacturing process differences?

A: The i3-7100H is built on a 14 nm process node, while the i7-880 uses a significantly older 45 nm process. The i7-880 also has a much larger die size at 296 mm² compared to 126 mm² for the i3-7100H, and contains 774 million transistors.

Q: Do these processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The i3-7100H supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The i7-880 only supports DDR3, also in dual-channel. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the clock speed situation for each chip?

A: The i3-7100H has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and no boost clock. The i7-880 has a base clock of 3.07 GHz and a boost clock of 3.73 GHz. Despite the i7-880's higher clock speeds, the i3-7100H still manages to match or slightly exceed its benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The i3-7100H uses the Kaby Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, while the i7-880 is based on the Nehalem architecture (codenamed Lynnfield) on a 45 nm process. This process shrink allows the i3-7100H to deliver competitive performance with a 35 W TDP, compared to the i7-880's much higher 95 W TDP. The i7-880 compensates for its older process with a larger physical footprint: its die size is 296 mm² versus the i3-7100H's 126 mm², and it packs 774 million transistors.

Cache hierarchies differ notably. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. However, the L3 cache is a major differentiator: the i7-880 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-7100H has only 3 MB. This larger cache pool is a traditional advantage for the i7-880 in certain workloads, but benchmark results do not reflect a decisive benefit.

The integrated graphics situation is also completely different. The i3-7100H includes Intel HD Graphics 630, making it a complete package for mobile systems. The i7-880 has no integrated graphics at all, requiring a discrete GPU. The i3-7100H also supports a newer PCIe generation (Gen 3 with 16 lanes) compared to the i7-880's PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes. Memory support differs as well, with the i3-7100H accepting both DDR3 and DDR4, while the i7-880 is limited to DDR3.

Socket compatibility is entirely divergent: the i3-7100H uses Intel BGA 1440 (soldered for mobile), while the i7-880 uses Intel Socket 1156 for desktop builds. The i3-7100H was released in January 2017, while the i7-880 was released in May 2010. Both are end-of-life products, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data tells a story of near-total parity, with the i3-7100H holding a consistent but tiny lead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-7100H scores 295 against the i7-880's 294, a 0.3% win. This is remarkable given that the i7-880 has twice the cores and threads. The same pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core: 1231 for the i3-7100H versus 1227 for the i7-880, again a 0.3% delta.

Single-core results are even closer. In Cinebench R20 single-core, both processors score exactly 173, resulting in a 0% delta and a nominal win for the i3-7100H. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows the i3-7100H at 414 and the i7-880 at 412, a 0.5% difference, the largest margin in any benchmark. The final test, Cinebench R23 multi-core, sees the i3-7100H at 2932 and the i7-880 at 2923, a 0.3% lead.

The aggregate numbers reinforce this picture. The i3-7100H has an average benchmark score of 1009, while the i7-880 sits at 1006. The i3-7100H's nearest rivals include the Intel Processor N100 (1007, 0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i7-2675QM (1012, -0.3% delta). The i7-880's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-10210Y (1006, 0% delta) and the AMD FX-9830P (1006, 0% delta). Both processors land in the bottom third of all CPUs by percentile, with the i3-7100H at the 28th percentile and the i7-880 at the 27th.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious difference: the i3-7100H has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-880 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds also differ, with the i3-7100H running at a base of 2.80 GHz with no boost, while the i7-880 runs at 3.07 GHz base and boosts to 3.73 GHz. The TDP gap is significant: 35 W for the i3-7100H versus 95 W for the i7-880.

The process node and physical dimensions diverge sharply. The i3-7100H uses 14 nm technology with a 126 mm² die, while the i7-880 uses 45 nm with a 296 mm² die and 774 million transistors. L3 cache is 3 MB for the i3-7100H and 8 MB for the i7-880. Memory support shows the i3-7100H accepting DDR3 and DDR4, while the i7-880 is DDR3-only. PCIe generation differs (Gen 3 for the i3-7100H, Gen 2 for the i7-880), and the i3-7100H includes integrated graphics while the i7-880 has none.

The socket types are incompatible: Intel BGA 1440 for the mobile i3-7100H versus Intel Socket 1156 for the desktop i7-880. The i3-7100H has a launch MSRP of $225, while no launch MSRP is available for the i7-880. The release dates are far apart, with the i3-7100H launching in January 2017 and the i7-880 in May 2010. Both have locked multipliers and are end-of-life. The part numbers are SR32T for the i3-7100H and SLBPS for the i7-880.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear verdict: the Intel Core i3-7100H is the better processor in every measured benchmark, despite having half the cores and threads of the i7-880. The i3-7100H wins all 5 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 0% to 0.5%. The i7-880 wins none. This outcome is attributable to the architectural advantages of Kaby Lake over Nehalem, including the 14 nm process versus 45 nm, which allows the i3-7100H to achieve comparable or better performance while consuming only 35 W versus 95 W. The i7-880's higher clock speeds (3.07 GHz base, 3.73 GHz boost) and larger 8 MB L3 cache are not enough to overcome the per-core efficiency of the newer design. The i3-7100H also offers integrated graphics, modern PCIe Gen 3, and broader memory support, making it the more complete package. For any user choosing between these two based solely on benchmark performance, the i3-7100H is the statistically superior option.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-7100H wins in every benchmark category where data exists. In multi-core workloads, it holds a 0.3% lead across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. In single-core workloads, it ties or slightly beats the i7-880, with a 0% delta in R20 and a 0.5% delta in R23. The i3-7100H also wins on efficiency, with a 35 W TDP compared to the i7-880's 95 W, meaning it can deliver this performance in a mobile form factor with less heat output. It includes integrated graphics, which the i7-880 completely lacks. For mobile computing, the i3-7100H is the only viable choice given its BGA 1440 socket and integrated GPU.

The Intel Core i7-880 does not win any benchmark, but it has structural advantages that may matter outside of the tested workloads. It offers 8 MB of L3 cache versus 3 MB, which could benefit cache-sensitive applications not represented in the Cinebench suite. Its 4 cores and 8 threads provide more parallel headroom, even if the benchmark scores do not reflect an advantage. The i7-880 also uses the desktop Socket 1156, which is a replaceable CPU socket rather than a soldered mobile BGA, offering upgradeability in a desktop context. Its higher base and boost clocks (3.07 GHz and 3.73 GHz) suggest potential in lightly threaded tasks, though the single-core benchmarks show the i3-7100H matching or slightly exceeding it. The i7-880's only unambiguous wins are in raw core count, thread count, L3 cache size, and clock speed, none of which translate to benchmark victories in the provided data.