Intel Core i7-2600 vs Intel Core i7-3820QM Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2600 and Intel Core i7-3820QM are two quad-core processors from different eras and market segments, yet they land remarkably close in overall average performance. The i7-2600 is a desktop Sandy Bridge part, while the i7-3820QM is a mobile Ivy Bridge chip. Benchmark data shows a near-tie in aggregate scoring, with the i7-2600 averaging 1370 and the i7-3820QM averaging 1366, a difference of just 0.3%. However, a closer look at individual workloads reveals a distinct split: the mobile chip wins consistently in Cinebench tests, while the desktop chip dominates Geekbench. This creates a practical decision point based on whether you prioritize raw compute consistency or specific application performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-2600 has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 1370, compared to the Intel Core i7-3820QM’s 1366. This puts the i7-2600 just 0.3% ahead, and both CPUs sit at the 36th percentile of all CPUs tracked.

Q: How do these chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The i7-3820QM wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 4777, beating the i7-2600’s 4519 by 5.4%. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench versions, where the mobile chip holds a consistent lead.

Q: Does the desktop i7-2600 win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, the i7-2600 wins both Geekbench tests decisively. It scores 2409 in Geekbench multi-core, an 18% advantage over the i7-3820QM’s 2041, and 712 in single-core, which is 18.5% higher than the mobile chip’s 601.

Q: Are both processors the same generation?

A: No. The i7-2600 is from the Sandy Bridge generation (Core i7 Sandy Bridge), while the i7-3820QM is from the Ivy Bridge generation (Core i7 Ivy Bridge). The i7-3820QM uses a newer 22 nm process node compared to the i7-2600’s 32 nm node.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The i7-3820QM has a TDP of 45 watts, which is significantly lower than the i7-2600’s 95 watts. This reflects the mobile design of the 3820QM versus the desktop-oriented 2600.

Q: Do both chips have the same cache configuration?

A: Yes, both feature 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Their core and thread counts are also identical at 4 cores and 8 threads.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architecture gap stems from the generational leap between Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge. The i7-2600 is built on Intel’s 32 nm process, while the i7-3820QM uses a newer 22 nm node. This process shrink explains notable differences in die size and transistor count: the i7-2600 has a 216 mm² die with 1,160 million transistors, whereas the i7-3820QM fits 1,400 million transistors into a smaller 160 mm² die. The denser, more efficient design of the 3820QM is a primary reason it achieves higher Cinebench scores despite lower clock speeds.

Clock speeds also diverge. The i7-2600 runs a base clock of 3.40 GHz and boosts to 3.80 GHz, while the i7-3820QM operates at a lower 2.70 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. Despite the clock deficit, the i7-3820QM’s Ivy Bridge architecture delivers better instructions per clock, allowing it to win all six Cinebench tests. The mobile chip also features Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics, a step up from the i7-2600’s Intel HD 2000, and it is soldered to an Intel BGA 1224 socket, whereas the desktop part uses the upgradeable Intel Socket 1155.

The memory support differs as well. The i7-2600 officially supports DDR3 memory, while the i7-3820QM’s memory support field is not specified in the data. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, and neither supports ECC memory. The i7-2600 also carries PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), a feature not listed for the mobile chip. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning they are not intended for overclocking.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of workload-specific dominance. The Intel Core i7-3820QM is the winner in all three generations of Cinebench tests, covering both multi-core and single-core variants. This includes a 5.4% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core (481 vs 455), a 4.5% edge in R15 single-core (67 vs 64), and a 5.4% advantage in R20 multi-core (2006 vs 1897). The consistency is striking: in R23 multi-core, the 3820QM scores 4777 against 4519, and in R23 single-core it posts 674 versus 638. If your workload leans on Cinebench-style rendering or CPU compute that scales similarly, the mobile chip is the better performer.

The Intel Core i7-2600, conversely, wins decisively in Geekbench. Its multi-core score of 2409 is 18% higher than the 3820QM’s 2041, and its single-core score of 712 is 18.5% above the 601 posted by the mobile part. This suggests the i7-2600 has a significant advantage in workloads that Geekbench models, which often include a mix of integer, floating-point, and memory-bound tasks. The data shows a total win count of 6 for the i7-3820QM and 2 for the i7-2600, but the Geekbench margins are much larger than the Cinebench margins, making the i7-2600’s wins particularly impactful for those specific benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category, reflecting their distinct design targets. The i7-2600 uses a desktop socket (Intel Socket 1155) and belongs to the Sandy Bridge architecture, while the i7-3820QM uses a mobile socket (Intel BGA 1224) and the Ivy Bridge architecture. The manufacturing process differs, with the i7-2600 on 32 nm and the i7-3820QM on 22 nm. Transistor counts are 1,160 million versus 1,400 million, and die sizes are 216 mm² versus 160 mm², respectively.

Clock speeds show the i7-2600 with a higher base (3.40 GHz vs 2.70 GHz) and boost (3.80 GHz vs 3.70 GHz). The TDP gap is substantial: 95 watts for the desktop part versus 45 watts for the mobile part. Integrated graphics are different, with the i7-2600 featuring Intel HD 2000 and the i7-3820QM featuring Intel HD 4000. The i7-2600 supports DDR3 memory and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the i7-3820QM’s memory support and PCIe specifications are not listed in the data. Both have 4 cores, 8 threads, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. The i7-2600 is marked as end-of-life, while the i7-3820QM’s production status is not specified. Release dates also differ: the i7-2600 launched on January 8, 2011, and the i7-3820QM on April 28, 2012.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results offer a textbook example of benchmark-specific outcomes. The i7-3820QM wins every Cinebench test, but the margins are moderate, ranging from 4.5% to 5.7%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 3820QM scores 481 against 455, a 5.4% delta. The single-core R15 result is closer: 67 versus 64, a 4.5% difference. Moving to R20, the 3820QM again takes multi-core with 2006 versus 1897 (5.4%) and single-core with 283 versus 267 (5.7%). The R23 results follow the same pattern: multi-core sees 4777 versus 4519 (5.4%), and single-core sees 674 versus 638 (5.3%).

The i7-2600’s wins are fewer but far more pronounced. In Geekbench multi-core, it posts 2409 against the 3820QM’s 2041, a commanding 18% lead. The single-core Geekbench test shows 712 versus 601, an 18.5% advantage. These are the largest deltas in the entire comparison, indicating that the i7-2600 has a significant performance edge in the specific operations Geekbench exercises. The net result is a split decision: the 3820QM has six wins, but the i7-2600 has the two most decisive victories. When averaging all scores, the i7-2600’s large Geekbench wins nearly offset the 3820QM’s consistent Cinebench advantages, producing the near-identical average scores of 1370 and 1366.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear, if unconventional, conclusion: choose based on your primary benchmark target, not the overall average. The Intel Core i7-3820QM is the better choice for Cinebench-style rendering workloads, winning all six Cinebench tests by margins of roughly 4.5% to 5.7%. Its newer Ivy Bridge architecture and 22 nm process likely explain why it outperforms the higher-clocked i7-2600 in these compute-heavy tasks, despite a 45-watt TDP constraint. If you are building a system around rendering or CPU-compute applications that mirror Cinebench, the 3820QM is the stronger silicon.

The Intel Core i7-2600 is the pick for Geekbench-style workloads. Its 18% multi-core and 18.5% single-core leads are substantial, dwarfing the Cinebench margins in the opposite direction. For users whose software suite aligns with Geekbench’s test patterns, the i7-2600 offers a significantly better experience. The desktop part also has the advantage of a socketed platform—Intel Socket 1155—compared to the soldered BGA 1224 of the mobile chip, though that is a platform consideration, not a performance one. Both processors sit at the 36th percentile of all CPUs, so neither is a top-tier performer today, but the i7-2600’s two big wins make it the more compelling option for Geekbench-centric applications. The 3820QM’s six wins make it the safer bet for general compute consistency, especially in rendering tasks.