Intel Core i3-9100HL vs Intel Core i7-2820QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2820QM and Intel Core i3-9100HL are both end-of-life quad-core processors, but they represent vastly different design eras and market segments. The data shows a consistent pattern: the older i7-2820QM, a 2011 mobile flagship, outperforms the newer i3-9100HL across every shared benchmark, despite the latter's more modern architecture and lower power envelope. This analysis examines the benchmark results, architectural differences, and the specific use cases where each chip retains a distinct advantage based solely on the provided facts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous. The Intel Core i7-2820QM wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with a remarkably consistent margin of roughly 19.5% across both multi-core and single-core workloads. This uniformity suggests a fundamental performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-2820QM scores 372 against the i3-9100HL’s 311, a 19.6% lead. The single-core R15 result for the i7-2820QM is 52, though the i3-9100HL has no corresponding single-core R15 entry in the data. The R20 tests show the same story: the i7-2820QM posts 1552 multi-core and 219 single-core, while the i3-9100HL manages 1299 multi-core and 183 single-core, yielding deltas of 19.5% and 19.7%, respectively.

The newest workload, Cinebench R23, reinforces the pattern. The i7-2820QM scores 3697 multi-core and 522 single-core. The i3-9100HL trails with 3094 multi-core and 436 single-core, again representing a 19.5% and 19.7% deficit. The near-identical deltas across all tests indicate that the performance gap is consistent regardless of whether the workload scales across all cores or relies on a single thread.

It is importantly the i7-2820QM’s average benchmark score of 1069 slightly edges out the i3-9100HL’s 1065. Both processors sit at the 29th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall standing among the broader CPU landscape. The nearest rivals for the i7-2820QM include the Intel Processor N95 (delta -0.1%), AMD Opteron 3380 (-0.2%), and AMD Athlon X4 880K (-0.2%), all within a fraction of a percent. The i3-9100HL’s nearest rivals are similarly close, including the Intel Xeon W3580 (+0.1%) and Intel Core i5-2380P (+0.2%).

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two processors is substantial. The i7-2820QM is built on Sandy Bridge, a 32 nm process from Intel’s foundry, with a die size of 216 mm² and 1,160 million transistors. The i3-9100HL uses the much newer Coffee Lake architecture (specifically Coffee Lake Refresh), fabricated on a 14 nm node with a smaller 126 mm² die size. The i3-9100HL does not list a transistor count, but the smaller die on a denser process implies a fundamentally different design philosophy.

Core and thread configurations differ sharply. The i7-2820QM offers 4 cores and 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the i3-9100HL has 4 cores and 4 threads with no simultaneous multithreading. This explains much of the multi-core performance gap. Cache hierarchies are similar in structure but differ in capacity: both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the i7-2820QM has 8 MB of shared L3 cache versus 6 MB for the i3-9100HL.

Clock speeds tell a complex story. The i7-2820QM has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The i3-9100HL’s base clock is listed as 1600.00 MHz (1.60 GHz) with a boost of 2.90 GHz. The i7-2820QM’s higher clocks, combined with its additional threads, drive its consistent lead. However, the i3-9100HL compensates with a dramatically lower TDP: 25 watts versus 45 watts, making it far more power-efficient per unit of performance.

Memory support is a key differentiator. The i3-9100HL supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, along with ECC memory support. The i7-2820QM’s memory support is not specified, but it also uses a dual-channel bus and lacks ECC capability. The i3-9100HL also features PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-2820QM does not list PCIe specifications.

Integrated graphics differ as well: the i7-2820QM pairs with Intel HD 3000, while the i3-9100HL includes UHD Graphics 630. Sockets are incompatible: the i7-2820QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B) aimed at mobile platforms, while the i3-9100HL uses Intel BGA 1440 and is classified as a desktop part.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the Intel Core i7-2820QM is the clear performance winner. It outperforms the i3-9100HL by roughly 19.5% in every shared Cinebench test, whether multi-core or single-core. Its additional threads (8 versus 4) and higher boost clock (3.40 GHz versus 2.90 GHz) provide a tangible advantage in both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads. For any user prioritizing raw compute performance in applications that can leverage its capabilities, the i7-2820QM is the superior choice.

However, the i3-9100HL is not without merit. Its 25 W TDP is nearly half that of the i7-2820QM’s 45 W, making it a far more efficient option for thermally constrained or power-sensitive environments. It also brings modern features the older chip lacks: DDR4 memory support with a specified 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, ECC memory, PCIe Gen 3 connectivity, and a newer integrated GPU (UHD Graphics 630 versus HD 3000). These features make the i3-9100HL a better fit for embedded or desktop systems where efficiency, memory compatibility, and platform longevity matter more than peak CPU performance.

The data shows both processors occupy the same 29th percentile of all CPUs and have nearly identical average benchmark scores (1069 vs 1065). The choice ultimately depends on whether the user values the i7-2820QM’s superior compute throughput or the i3-9100HL’s modern feature set and lower power draw.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-2820QM wins all multi-core Cinebench tests, scoring 372 in R15, 1552 in R20, and 3697 in R23, versus the i3-9100HL’s 311, 1299, and 3094, respectively. The margin is consistently about 19.5%.

Q: Does the i3-9100HL win any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i7-2820QM wins all five shared benchmarks, with the i3-9100HL recording zero wins.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The i7-2820QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-9100HL has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i7-2820QM’s Hyper-Threading support gives it twice the thread count.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The i7-2820QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the i3-9100HL has a TDP of 25 watts. The i3-9100HL consumes significantly less power.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The i3-9100HL supports ECC memory, while the i7-2820QM does not.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The i7-2820QM has an average benchmark score of 1069, and the i3-9100HL has an average benchmark score of 1065. Both sit at the 29th percentile of all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2820QM wins decisively in raw processing power. Its 8 threads and higher clock speeds (2.30 GHz base, 3.40 GHz boost) deliver a 19.5% to 19.7% advantage across all Cinebench versions. This makes it the better choice for CPU-intensive applications such as video rendering, 3D modeling, and any workload that can utilize multiple threads. Its larger 8 MB L3 cache also provides an edge in data-heavy tasks. The i7-2820QM’s 45 W TDP is a trade-off, but for performance-first mobile workstations, the benchmark results justify the higher power draw.

The Intel Core i3-9100HL wins in efficiency and platform modernity. Its 25 W TDP makes it suitable for passively cooled or low-power systems where heat dissipation is a constraint. It offers DDR4 memory support with a specified bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, which the i7-2820QM lacks, and it is the only one of the two with ECC memory capability. Its PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) provides a newer connectivity standard, and its UHD Graphics 630 is a more recent integrated GPU than the i7-2820QM’s HD 3000. For desktop or embedded applications prioritizing memory flexibility, error correction, and power efficiency over peak CPU performance, the i3-9100HL is the logical pick.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-2820QM | Intel Core i3-9100HL |

|---|---|---|

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 1600.00 MHz (1.60 GHz) |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Intel BGA 1440 |

| Architecture | Sandy Bridge | Coffee Lake |

| Process Node | 32 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | 216 mm² | 126 mm² |

| Transistors | 1,160 million | Not specified |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | Not specified | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 42.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 3000 | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2011-01-02 | 2019-03-31 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $225 |

| Part Number | SR012 | SRFEK |