Intel Core i5-1030NG7 vs Intel Core i7-3740QM Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-3740QM wins in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 4859 versus 4759 for the i5-1030NG7, a 2.1% advantage. The lead is consistent across Cinebench R15 (489 vs 479, +2.1%) and Cinebench R20 (2040 vs 1998, +2.1%).

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel Core i5-1030NG7 comes out ahead?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i7-3740QM winning all six benchmark comparisons. The i5-1030NG7's closest result is a 1.9% deficit in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 4759 against the i7's 4859.

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

A: The i7-3740QM leads in every single-core test as well. Its advantage ranges from 2.2% in Cinebench R23 (686 vs 671) to 3% in Cinebench R15 (69 vs 67). The i5-1030NG7 trails by 2.5% in Cinebench R20 single-core (281 vs 288).

Q: What are the thermal design power (TDP) differences?

A: The i7-3740QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the i5-1030NG7 is rated at just 10 watts. This represents a 35-watt gap, indicating the i5-1030NG7 is designed for significantly lower power consumption.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads. They also share the same 6 MB shared L3 cache, though the i5-1030NG7 has a larger per-core L1 cache (80 KB per core) compared to the i7-3740QM's 64 KB per core.

Q: Which architecture is newer?

A: The i5-1030NG7 uses Ice Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, released in 2020. The i7-3740QM is based on Ivy Bridge on a 22 nm process, released in 2012. The i5-1030NG7 is marked as end-of-life production status.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent completely different eras of Intel mobile computing. The i7-3740QM is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, which uses a 22 nm process node manufactured on a 160 mm² die with 1,400 million transistors. In contrast, the i5-1030NG7 adopts the Ice Lake architecture with a 10 nm process and a smaller 123 mm² die. The fact that the newer part achieves comparable performance on a significantly smaller die and with far lower power draw suggests substantial architectural efficiency gains.

The cache hierarchies reveal a notable difference in the L1 cache. The i7-3740QM provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, while the i5-1030NG7 offers 80 KB per core. Both processors share the same 256 KB per-core L2 cache and the same 6 MB shared L3 cache. This larger L1 allocation in the Ice Lake part could theoretically improve data locality, though benchmark results show the older chip still holds a slight edge.

The integrated graphics differ substantially: the i7-3740QM uses Intel HD 4000, while the i5-1030NG7 features Iris Plus with 64 execution units. The newer part also supports DDR4 memory with a measured bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, whereas the older chip's memory support is not specified in the data. The i5-1030NG7 also has PCIe Gen 3 support, which the i7-3740QM lacks in the specifications.

The production statuses tell a story of lifecycle: the i5-1030NG7 is explicitly marked as end-of-life, while the i7-3740QM has no production status listed. Both are mobile processors, but they target different power envelopes — the i7-3740QM is a 45-watt part, while the i5-1030NG7 sips just 10 watts. This 4.5x difference in power budget likely explains why the newer chip can achieve near-parity performance despite its much lower thermal allowance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a remarkably consistent picture: the i7-3740QM wins every single comparison, but by margins so narrow that they border on statistical noise. In multi-core workloads, the lead is a uniform 2.1% across all three Cinebench versions. The R15 multi-core test shows 489 versus 479, the R20 test shows 2040 versus 1998, and the R23 test shows 4859 versus 4759. This consistency across different rendering workloads suggests a genuine, if small, performance advantage rather than a measurement artifact.

Single-core performance tells a similar story with slightly larger margins. The i7-3740QM leads by 3% in Cinebench R15 single-core (69 vs 67), by 2.5% in Cinebench R20 (288 vs 281), and by 2.2% in Cinebench R23 (686 vs 671). The pattern is interesting: the gap narrows as the workload gets more modern, possibly indicating that the Ice Lake architecture's newer instruction set or better IPC helps close the distance in more demanding single-threaded scenarios.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this near-tie. The i7-3740QM averages 1378 across all benchmarks, while the i5-1030NG7 averages 1376. The delta between them is 0.2% in favor of the older chip. Both processors sit at the 36th percentile of all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier in the broader market. The nearest rivals for both chips are essentially identical: AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200, AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 2300U, and AMD Opteron 6366 HE all cluster within 0.2% of both processors' average scores.

The Geekbench results are only available for the i7-3740QM, which scores 1993 multi-core and 599 single-core. Without corresponding i5-1030NG7 data, these scores cannot be directly compared, but they provide context for where the Ivy Bridge part sits in general-purpose workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-3740QM | Intel Core i5-1030NG7 |

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

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 1100.00 MHz (1.10 GHz) |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 10 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1224 | Intel BGA 1044 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Ice Lake |

| Codename | Ivy Bridge | Ice Lake-Y |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| Memory Support | Not specified | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 51.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Not specified | Gen 3 |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4000 | Iris Plus (64EU) |

| Release Date | 2012-09-02 | 2020-03-17 |

| Production Status | Not specified | End-of-life |

| Part Number | Not specified | SRGM7 |

The most striking specification contrast is the base clock. The i7-3740QM runs at 2.70 GHz natively, while the i5-1030NG7 has a base clock of just 1.10 GHz. However, both boost to similar frequencies — 3.70 GHz for the older chip and 3.50 GHz for the newer one. This suggests the i5-1030NG7 relies much more heavily on boost behavior to achieve its performance, which is consistent with its ultra-low 10-watt power envelope.

The L2 cache is identical at 256 KB per core, and both share 6 MB of L3 cache. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both use dual-channel memory buses. The i5-1030NG7 is the only one with explicit memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s) and PCIe Gen 3 support listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-3740QM wins in every measured benchmark category. It is faster in multi-core rendering across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, with a consistent 2.1% edge. It also wins in single-core performance, with margins between 2.2% and 3%. If raw compute performance is the sole criterion, the i7-3740QM is the clear choice based on this data.

However, the i5-1030NG7 has advantages that are not captured in benchmark scores. Its 10-watt TDP versus 45 watts for the i7-3740QM means it can operate in much thinner and lighter chassis without aggressive cooling. The newer Ice Lake architecture with its 10 nm process and Iris Plus graphics (64 EU) offers a more modern feature set, including DDR4 memory support, 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 3. The larger 80 KB per-core L1 cache could also benefit certain workloads that exhibit high data reuse.

The i5-1030NG7 also benefits from being released in 2020 versus 2012, meaning it has access to newer platform features and potentially better software optimization. Its end-of-life status, though, indicates it is no longer being produced, which may affect long-term availability.

The Verdict

The data presents a curious case: an older, higher-power processor consistently outperforms a much newer, far more efficient part, but only by a hair. The i7-3740QM's 6-0 record in head-to-head benchmarks is unambiguous, yet the victory margins of 2.1% to 3% are small enough that real-world differences would be difficult to perceive in most applications.

For users who prioritize maximum compute performance in mobile workloads, the i7-3740QM is the statistically better choice. Its higher boost clock of 3.70 GHz versus 3.50 GHz, combined with its 45-watt power budget, gives it a measurable edge in rendering tasks. The 3% single-core win in Cinebench R15 and the uniform 2.1% multi-core advantage provide a clear, if modest, performance story.

For users who prioritize portability, battery life, and modern platform features, the i5-1030NG7 is the more sensible pick despite losing every benchmark. Its 10-watt TDP is a fraction of the i7-3740QM's 45 watts, enabling fanless or near-silent designs. The Ice Lake architecture brings DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, PCIe Gen 3, and Iris Plus graphics with 64 execution units — none of which the Ivy Bridge part can match. The 123 mm² die size versus 160 mm² also indicates better manufacturing efficiency.

The average benchmark scores tell the final story: 1378 for the i7-3740QM versus 1376 for the i5-1030NG7, a difference of 0.2%. Both sit at the 36th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rival for both is the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 at 1379, which is within 0.1% of both Intel parts. In practical terms, these are equivalent performers. The i7-3740QM wins the benchmark sweep, but the i5-1030NG7 wins the efficiency and platform-feature argument. The choice depends entirely on whether raw benchmark scores or power consumption and modern features matter more for the intended use case.