Intel Core i7-10510Y vs Intel Core i7-2670QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2670QM and the Intel Core i7-10510Y are both 4-core, 8-thread mobile processors, but they represent radically different eras and design philosophies. The benchmark data reveals a stunning outcome: despite being released roughly eight years apart, the older Sandy Bridge chip (i7-2670QM) edges out the newer Comet Lake chip (i7-10510Y) in every single tested workload, albeit by razor-thin margins. The i7-2670QM wins all five head-to-head tests with deltas ranging from 0.1% to 0.5%, while the i7-10510Y posts a 30th percentile score versus the 2670QM's 31st percentile. This near-parity is remarkable given the 45W TDP of the older part versus the 9W TDP of the newer one, but the data is unambiguous: the 2670QM is the faster processor in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-2670QM holds a higher average benchmark score of 1096, compared to the Intel Core i7-10510Y's average of 1092. This places the 2670QM in the 31st percentile of all CPUs, while the 10510Y sits in the 30th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The i7-2670QM scores 3177 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the i7-10510Y scores 3173. This gives the 2670QM a 0.1% advantage, making the difference effectively negligible for real-world multi-threaded rendering.

Q: Does the newer i7-10510Y win any single benchmark?

A: No. According to the head-to-head benchmark data, the i7-10510Y wins zero tests. The i7-2670QM wins all five benchmarks, including both single-core and multi-core variants of Cinebench R20 and R23.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The i7-2670QM has a TDP of 45 watts, while the i7-10510Y has a significantly lower TDP of 9 watts. This makes the 10510Y a much more power-efficient part, despite its slightly lower performance.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i7-10510Y has a larger shared L3 cache of 8 MB, while the i7-2670QM has a shared L3 cache of 6 MB. Both processors feature 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 cache per core.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The i7-2670QM's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-2710QE, with an identical average score of 1096 and a 0% delta. The i7-10510Y's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-4600M, which scores 1093, putting the 10510Y just 0.1% behind that rival.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures, separated by several generations of Intel design. The i7-2670QM uses the Sandy Bridge architecture, fabricated on a 32nm process node at Intel's foundry. It integrates 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. In contrast, the i7-10510Y uses the Comet Lake architecture, specifically the Comet Lake-Y codename, built on a larger 14nm process node. The fact pack does not list transistor count or die size for the 10510Y, but the process node difference alone indicates a major architectural shift.

Both chips share the same core and thread configuration: 4 cores and 8 threads. They also both feature non-unlocked multipliers. The cache hierarchies are similar in structure, with 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core on both, but they differ in L3: the 2670QM has 6 MB shared, while the 10510Y has 8 MB shared. The memory bus also differs: the 2670QM uses dual-channel memory, while the 10510Y supports DDR3 memory (the fact pack does not specify its bus width).

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 2670QM pairs with Intel HD 3000, while the 10510Y includes UHD Graphics. The production statuses reflect their ages: the 2670QM is end-of-life, while the 10510Y remains active. The sockets are incompatible: the 2670QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), while the 10510Y uses Intel BGA 1440. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a complete shutout for the i7-2670QM, but every victory is by a margin smaller than 1%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 2670QM scores 320 against the 10510Y's 319, a 0.3% lead. The Cinebench R20 multicore test shows a similar pattern: 1334 for the 2670QM versus 1332 for the 10510Y, a 0.2% difference. The single-core tests follow suit, with the 2670QM taking Cinebench R20 single-core at 188 versus 187 (0.5% lead) and Cinebench R23 single-core at 448 versus 447 (0.2% lead).

The largest delta in the entire comparison is the 0.5% advantage in Cinebench R20 single-core, which is still statistically insignificant. The smallest margin is 0.1% in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the 2670QM scores 3177 and the 10510Y scores 3173. These results indicate that the two processors are functionally equivalent in raw compute performance, despite the massive TDP and architectural differences. The 2670QM's win count of 5 to 0 is decisive in a categorical sense, but the magnitude of each win is so small that real-world applications would not distinguish between them.

The average benchmark scores corroborate this picture. The 2670QM averages 1096, while the 10510Y averages 1092, a difference of just 4 points. In the context of their nearest rivals, the 2670QM matches the i7-2710QE exactly (0% delta) and edges the i5-3470S by 0.1%. The 10510Y trails the i7-4600M by 0.1% and beats the i5-3475S by 0.1%. Both chips occupy essentially the same performance tier.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the Intel Core i7-2670QM is the faster processor. It wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, holds a higher average score, and sits one percentile point higher in the global ranking. However, the performance advantage is almost purely symbolic — a 0.3% lead in Cinebench R15 and a 0.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore are within any conceivable margin of error. No user would notice the difference between a score of 320 and 319 in a real-world render.

The real story is the efficiency gap. The 2670QM achieves this parity while consuming 45 watts, whereas the 10510Y does so at just 9 watts — a fivefold difference in TDP. For anyone prioritizing battery life, thermals, or thin-and-light form factors, the 10510Y is the obvious choice despite its slightly lower scores. For anyone who already owns a device with the 2670QM, there is no performance reason to upgrade based on this data alone. The 2670QM's end-of-life status and the 10510Y's active status do not change the benchmark outcomes.

The verdict depends entirely on the use case, not the numbers. If raw multi-core throughput is the sole criterion, the 2670QM wins. If power efficiency and modern platform features are paramount, the 10510Y is the better engineering achievement, delivering nearly identical performance at a fraction of the power draw.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, though their core counts and thread counts are identical. The base clock speeds are vastly different: the i7-2670QM runs at 2.20 GHz, while the i7-10510Y runs at a nominal 1200.00 MHz (1.20 GHz). However, the boost clocks reverse this trend: the 2670QM boosts to 3.10 GHz, while the 10510Y boosts to 4.50 GHz. This explains how the 10510Y keeps pace despite its low base clock — it relies heavily on turbo boost.

The TDP difference is the most striking specification gap: 45 watts for the 2670QM versus 9 watts for the 10510Y. The process nodes also differ, with the 2670QM using 32nm and the 10510Y using 14nm. The sockets are incompatible (G2 vs BGA 1440), and the L3 cache sizes differ (6 MB vs 8 MB). The integrated graphics are different (HD 3000 vs UHD Graphics). The memory support also differs: the 2670QM uses dual-channel memory, while the 10510Y lists DDR3 support. The release dates are far apart, with the 2670QM launching in October 2011 and the 10510Y in August 2019. The 2670QM has a part number (SR02N), while the 10510Y does not list one.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-2670QM wins in every benchmark category listed, including Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore and single-core, and R23 multicore and single-core. Its wins are consistent but marginal, with the largest being 0.5% in Cinebench R20 single-core. If the decision is based purely on benchmark scores, the 2670QM is the clear winner, and it also offers the advantage of a lower base clock but a higher sustained power envelope, which may translate to better sustained performance in power-unconstrained environments.

The i7-10510Y wins no benchmarks, but it wins in every non-performance category. Its 9W TDP makes it suitable for fanless or passively cooled designs, and its higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz suggests it can burst to higher single-thread speeds when needed, even if the average results don't show it. Its active production status means it is still available for new designs, whereas the 2670QM is end-of-life. The 10510Y also has a larger L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB) and a more modern 14nm process, which typically enables better power efficiency per clock cycle.

For a workstation replacement laptop where the 45W TDP can be managed, the 2670QM is the better choice based on the data. For a slim ultraportable or a tablet where the 9W TDP is critical, the 10510Y is the only viable option, and the performance penalty is negligible. The 10510Y's DDR3 memory support and UHD Graphics also make it a more modern platform, even if the raw compute scores are nearly identical. In essence, the 2670QM wins on paper, but the 10510Y wins in practice for most modern mobile use cases.