Intel Core i3-8130U vs Intel Core i7-2630QM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a fascinating split between these two mobile processors. Across the seven shared benchmark tests, the Intel Core i7-2630QM claims victory in five, while the Intel Core i3-8130U takes the remaining two. However, the magnitude of those two wins is staggering, flipping the overall narrative on its head.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the older Sandy Bridge chip shows remarkable consistency. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-2630QM scores 304 against the i3-8130U’s 301, a 1% lead. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore (1268 vs 1257, a 0.9% edge) and Cinebench R23 multicore (3020 vs 2995, a 0.8% advantage). Even in single-core Cinebench tests, where the newer architecture should theoretically shine, the i7-2630QM edges ahead: 178 vs 177 in R20 single-core (0.6% higher) and 426 vs 422 in R23 single-core (0.9% higher). These are razor-thin margins, but they are consistent across every Cinebench iteration.

The Geekbench results tell a completely different story. In Geekbench multicore, the i3-8130U scores 1762 versus the i7-2630QM’s 1393. That is a 20.9% deficit for the older chip. The single-core Geekbench test is even more lopsided: 898 for the i3-8130U against 445 for the i7-2630QM, a 50.4% swing. This is not a marginal difference; it is a generational leap in per-thread performance. The i3-8130U more than doubles the single-core Geekbench score of its rival.

What explains this contradiction? The Cinebench tests may be more sensitive to the i7-2630QM’s eight threads versus the i3-8130U’s four, allowing the older chip to compensate for its architectural disadvantages through sheer thread count. Geekbench, on the other hand, appears to reward the newer Kaby Lake core design’s higher clock speeds and improved instructions per clock. The i3-8130U boosts to 3.40 GHz versus the i7-2630QM’s 2.90 GHz, and that frequency advantage, combined with a much newer microarchitecture, manifests most clearly in lightly threaded workloads.

The average benchmark scores reflect this tension. The i7-2630QM averages 1005 across all recorded tests, landing in the 27th percentile of all CPUs. The i3-8130U averages 994, also in the 27th percentile. The nearest rivals for the i7-2630QM include the Intel Core i7-5600U at exactly 1005 (0% delta) and the AMD FX-9830P at 1006 (-0.1% delta). For the i3-8130U, the closest competitor is the AMD Phenom II X6 1065T at 993 (0.1% delta) and the Intel Xeon W3565 at 993 (0.1% delta). Both processors sit in the same performance tier, despite their wildly different architectures and release dates.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the benchmark data. The Intel Core i7-2630QM wins in sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads, as evidenced by its victories across all four Cinebench multicore tests. The 1% advantage in R15, 0.9% in R20, and 0.8% in R23 may seem small, but they demonstrate that the 4-core, 8-thread configuration provides a genuine edge in heavily parallelized tasks. For video encoding, 3D rendering, or any workload that can utilize all eight threads, the i7-2630QM is the stronger choice.

The Intel Core i3-8130U dominates in single-threaded and lightly threaded scenarios. The 50.4% lead in Geekbench single-core is decisive, indicating that everyday tasks like web browsing, office productivity, and light application usage will feel snappier on the newer chip. The 20.9% advantage in Geekbench multicore is more surprising, suggesting that even in multi-threaded Geekbench workloads, the i3-8130U’s superior per-core efficiency outweighs its thread deficit. This implies the Geekbench multicore test may not scale perfectly with thread count, or that the Kaby Lake architecture’s efficiency gains are substantial enough to overcome having half the threads.

The i3-8130U also wins in energy efficiency, though this is qualitative. Its 15W TDP versus the i7-2630QM’s 45W TDP indicates the newer chip is designed for thin-and-light systems with limited cooling and battery capacity. The i7-2630QM, with its 45W envelope, belongs in larger laptops or mobile workstations where sustained performance matters more than portability.

The Verdict

The data points to a nuanced conclusion. For users running heavily threaded professional workloads, the Intel Core i7-2630QM is the better performer, as its Cinebench multicore victories demonstrate. The 3020 Cinebench R23 multicore score versus 2995 for the i3-8130U, while narrow, represents a real advantage in rendering tasks. Its eight threads allow it to maintain parity or a slight edge despite being seven years older in architecture terms.

For users prioritizing everyday responsiveness, the Intel Core i3-8130U is the clear winner. The Geekbench single-core score of 898 versus 445 is a 50.4% improvement, which will translate to noticeably faster application launches, smoother web browsing, and quicker response times in software that relies on single-thread performance. The 1762 Geekbench multicore score also beats the i7-2630QM’s 1393 by 20.9%, meaning even in mixed workloads, the newer chip often comes out ahead.

The production status tells part of the story: the i7-2630QM is end-of-life, while the i3-8130U is active. The i3-8130U also supports DDR4 memory, whereas the i7-2630QM’s memory support is not listed in the database, suggesting a DDR3-era platform. The integrated graphics differ as well: Intel HD 3000 on the older chip versus UHD 620 on the newer one, which implies better media playback and display output capabilities for the i3-8130U.

Choose the i7-2630QM if your primary workloads are multi-threaded rendering or encoding and you have a system with adequate cooling. Choose the i3-8130U for general-purpose computing, portability, and single-threaded performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-2630QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How do they compare in single-core performance?

A: The i3-8130U is significantly ahead, scoring 898 in Geekbench single-core versus 445 for the i7-2630QM, a 50.4% advantage. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7-2630QM edges ahead 426 to 422.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The i7-2630QM has a TDP of 45W, while the i3-8130U has a TDP of 15W, making the newer chip far more suitable for slim laptops.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The i3-8130U was released in 2018, while the i7-2630QM was released in 2011. The i3-8130U is based on Kaby Lake architecture and a 14nm process, versus Sandy Bridge and 32nm for the older chip.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-2630QM averages 1005 across all tests, while the i3-8130U averages 994. Both sit in the 27th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which chip has a larger L3 cache?

A: The i7-2630QM has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-8130U has 4 MB of shared L3 cache.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent entirely different eras of Intel mobile design. The i7-2630QM uses Sandy Bridge architecture, built on a 32nm process with 1,160 million transistors and a die size of 216 mm². It uses the Intel Socket G2 (988B) and features Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics. The i3-8130U uses Kaby Lake-R architecture (codename Kaby Lake-U Refresh), built on a 14nm process with a die size of 123 mm². It uses the Intel BGA 1356 socket and integrates UHD 620 graphics.

Cache hierarchies are similar in structure but differ in size. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache differs: the i7-2630QM has 6 MB shared, while the i3-8130U has 4 MB shared. The newer chip’s smaller L3 is offset by its much newer core design and higher clock speeds.

The i3-8130U supports DDR4 memory, while memory support is not listed for the i7-2630QM. Both are dual-channel capable, though the memory bus field is only populated for the older chip. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The core specification differences are stark. The i7-2630QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks differ: 2000 MHz for the older chip versus 2400 MHz for the newer one. Boost clocks also differ: 2.90 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, favoring the i3-8130U.

TDP is the most dramatic specification gap: 45W for the i7-2630QM versus 15W for the i3-8130U. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket G2 (988B) versus Intel BGA 1356. Architecture and process node differ (Sandy Bridge 32nm versus Kaby Lake 14nm), as do the integrated graphics (HD 3000 versus UHD 620). The i3-8130U has DDR4 memory support listed, while the i7-2630QM does not. Production status differs (end-of-life versus active), as does release date (2011 versus 2018). The i7-2630QM has a listed part number (SR02Y), while the i3-8130U does not. The die size also differs: 216 mm² versus 123 mm².