Intel Core i3-8130U vs Intel Core i7-2635QM Comparison

The benchmark data presents an unusual split decision: the Intel Core i7-2635QM and Intel Core i3-8130U deliver identical scores across five of seven tested workloads, yet the i3-8130U decisively wins the Geekbench tests. The i7-2635QM is a 2011 quad-core Sandy Bridge part, while the i3-8130U is a 2018 dual-core Kaby Lake-R part. Their overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical—995 for the i7 versus 994 for the i3—placing both at the 27th percentile among all CPUs. This means the two processors are statistical peers in aggregate performance, but the nature of their strengths is entirely different.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking finding is the exact parity in Cinebench results. In Cinebench R15 multicore, both chips score 301 points. In Cinebench R20 multicore, both score 1257 points. The single-core results are equally identical: 177 points in Cinebench R20 single-core and 422 points in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Cinebench R23 multicore test also shows a perfect tie at 2995 points. Across these five benchmarks, the deltaPct is 0.0%, meaning neither processor has any measurable advantage in rendering workloads. The i7-2635QM is credited with the win in these categories, but this is purely nominal—the scores are identical, so the "win" reflects the tie-breaking convention rather than actual performance superiority.

The Geekbench results tell a completely different story. In Geekbench multicore, the i3-8130U scores 1762 versus the i7-2635QM's 1371, a 22.2% advantage for the newer chip. The single-core gap is even larger: the i3-8130U scores 898 versus 442, a 50.8% lead. These are substantial, real-world differences that indicate the i3-8130U has far superior per-thread performance. The Geekbench single-core result is particularly telling—the i3-8130U is more than twice as fast as the i7-2635QM in this test. This explains why the i3-8130U's average benchmark score of 994 nearly matches the i7-2635QM's 995 despite the i7 having twice as many physical cores and threads.

The data shows a clear pattern: in multi-threaded Cinebench tests, the i7-2635QM's four cores and eight threads compensate for its older architecture, matching the i3-8130U's two cores and four threads. But in Geekbench, which appears more sensitive to clock speed and architectural efficiency, the i3-8130U's higher base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 3.40 GHz, combined with its newer Kaby Lake design, deliver decisive wins. The i3-8130U's 50.8% single-core advantage is the largest margin in any benchmark.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras of Intel's mobile lineup. The i7-2635QM uses the Sandy Bridge architecture on a 32 nm process node, while the i3-8130U uses the Kaby Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node. This node difference is significant—the 32 nm process is nearly twice as large as the 14 nm process, which explains the i7-2635QM's larger die size of 216 mm² versus the i3-8130U's 123 mm². The i7-2635QM packs 1,160 million transistors, while the i3-8130U's transistor count is not listed.

Core configuration is the other major divergence. The i7-2635QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Both use a 64 KB L1 cache per core and a 256 KB L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache differs: the i7-2635QM has 6 MB shared, while the i3-8130U has 4 MB shared. The i7-2635QM's larger L3 cache likely helps it maintain parity in Cinebench despite its older architecture.

Power characteristics also differ substantially. The i7-2635QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the i3-8130U has a TDP of 15 watts. This is a threefold difference in power draw, making the i3-8130U far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops. The i7-2635QM uses the Intel BGA 1224 socket, while the i3-8130U uses the Intel BGA 1356 socket, meaning they are not interchangeable in any system.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i7-2635QM features Intel HD 3000, while the i3-8130U features UHD 620. The i3-8130U also explicitly supports DDR4 memory, whereas the i7-2635QM's memory support is not specified. Both processors have locked multipliers, disabling overclocking. The i7-2635QM is end-of-life, while the i3-8130U remains active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM has an average benchmark score of 995, while the Intel Core i3-8130U has an average of 994. The difference is 0.1%, with the i7-2635QM listed as having a 0.1% advantage over the i3-8130U in the nearestRivals data.

Q: How do the Cinebench scores compare between the two?

A: They are identical across all tested Cinebench workloads. Both score 301 in Cinebench R15 multicore, 1257 in Cinebench R20 multicore, 177 in Cinebench R20 single-core, 2995 in Cinebench R23 multicore, and 422 in Cinebench R23 single-core. The deltaPct is 0% in every case.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench single-core, where the Intel Core i3-8130U scores 898 versus the i7-2635QM's 442. This represents a 50.8% advantage for the i3-8130U. The Geekbench multicore test shows a 22.2% advantage for the i3-8130U, with scores of 1762 versus 1371.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Despite having half the cores and threads, the i3-8130U matches or beats the i7-2635QM in every benchmark.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these processors?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM has a TDP of 45 watts. The Intel Core i3-8130U has a TDP of 15 watts. This makes the i3-8130U a much lower-power part, suitable for fanless or passively cooled designs.

Q: What process nodes are used for each chip?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM is built on a 32 nm process node. The Intel Core i3-8130U is built on a 14 nm process node. The i3-8130U's smaller process node contributes to its lower power consumption and higher clock speeds.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The i7-2635QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-8130U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2000.00 MHz for the i7-2635QM and 2.40 GHz for the i3-8130U. Boost clocks are 2.90 GHz and 3.40 GHz, respectively. TDP is 45 watts versus 15 watts.

The socket types differ: Intel BGA 1224 for the i7-2635QM and Intel BGA 1356 for the i3-8130U. The architecture is Sandy Bridge versus Kaby Lake, with codenames Sandy Bridge and Kaby Lake-R. Process nodes are 32 nm versus 14 nm. Die size is 216 mm² versus 123 mm². Transistor count is 1,160 million for the i7-2635QM, while the i3-8130U's count is not specified.

Cache configurations differ in L3: the i7-2635QM has 6 MB shared, while the i3-8130U has 4 MB shared. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB per core and 256 KB per core. Memory support is unspecified for the i7-2635QM, but the i3-8130U supports DDR4. Integrated graphics are Intel HD 3000 versus UHD 620. The i7-2635QM has part number SR030, while the i3-8130U has no part number listed. Release dates are January 2011 for the i7-2635QM and February 2018 for the i3-8130U. Production status is end-of-life versus active.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-8130U wins decisively in Geekbench single-core and multicore tests. The single-core score of 898 versus 442 is a 50.8% advantage, and the multicore score of 1762 versus 1371 is a 22.2% advantage. This makes the i3-8130U the clear choice for workloads that depend on per-thread performance, such as everyday productivity applications, web browsing, and lightly threaded software. Its 15-watt TDP also makes it suitable for ultraportable laptops where battery life and thermal management are priorities.

The Intel Core i7-2635QM's victories are nominal—it is credited with wins in all five Cinebench tests, but the scores are exactly equal to the i3-8130U's. The i7-2635QM does not actually outperform the i3-8130U in any benchmark; it merely ties. However, the parity in Cinebench is noteworthy given that the i3-8130U has half the cores and threads. This suggests the i7-2635QM's 6 MB L3 cache and quad-core design allow it to hold its own in heavily multi-threaded rendering workloads, even against a much newer processor with higher clock speeds.

The i7-2635QM's strengths are thus limited to scenarios where its additional cores and larger cache make a difference—specifically, multi-threaded content creation tasks that scale across cores. But the data shows that in practice, the i3-8130U matches it even there. The i7-2635QM's 45-watt TDP and larger die size offer no performance benefit in the tested benchmarks. The i3-8130U wins where it matters: single-core performance, multi-core Geekbench performance, power efficiency, and lower thermal output.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i3-8130U is the superior processor for virtually all use cases based on this data. It wins two benchmarks outright, with margins of 22.2% and 50.8%, and ties the i7-2635QM in the remaining five. The i3-8130U achieves this with a 15-watt TDP, making it far more power-efficient than the i7-2635QM's 45-watt TDP. Its newer 14 nm Kaby Lake architecture delivers significantly higher clock speeds—2.40 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost versus 2.00 GHz and 2.90 GHz—which translate directly into superior single-threaded performance.

The i7-2635QM's only claim to relevance is its parity in Cinebench workloads, where its quad-core design compensates for its age. But parity is not an advantage. If a workload runs well on the i7-2635QM, it runs equally well on the i3-8130U. If a workload favors single-threaded performance, the i3-8130U is vastly better. The i7-2635QM's end-of-life status and larger power footprint further diminish its appeal.

Users who need maximum multi-threaded rendering performance should note that neither chip excels—both score 2995 in Cinebench R23 multicore, placing them at the 27th percentile overall. But for anyone choosing between these two specific parts, the Intel Core i3-8130U is the clear pick. It delivers equal or better performance in every benchmark while consuming one-third the power. The data does not support any scenario where the i7-2635QM is the better choice. The verdict is unambiguous: the i3-8130U wins on performance per watt, single-core speed, and overall efficiency. The i7-2635QM is a legacy part that, while still functional, offers no measurable advantage over its much younger rival.