CPU Comparison

Intel Processor N100 and Intel Core i7-2630QM are two mobile processors separated by over a decade of architectural evolution, yet they land in the same performance percentile. The N100, a modern 10 nm Gracemont part, posts an average benchmark score of 1007, while the Sandy Bridge-based i7-2630QM scores 1005. Both sit at the 27th percentile among all CPUs, and their nearest rivals are nearly identical, including the AMD FX-9830P and Intel Core i7-880. The data shows a generational clash: the N100 wins on efficiency and single-thread speed, while the i7-2630QM counter-punches with multi-threaded muscle in newer workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Processor N100 dominates in single-thread tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 910.5 versus the i7-2630QM’s 426, a 113.7% advantage. The N100 also leads in Cinebench R15 single-core with 147.9, though the i7-2630QM lacks a comparable R15 single-core score in the data.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-core workloads?

A: Results are mixed. The N100 wins Cinebench R15 multicore with 401.5 against 304, a 32.1% margin. However, the i7-2630QM takes Cinebench R23 multicore with 3020 versus 2559.5, a 15.2% lead. The i7-2630QM also shows a Geekbench multicore score of 1393, while no Geekbench multicore result is listed for the N100.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: Both have 4 physical cores. The N100 runs 4 threads (no Hyper-Threading), while the i7-2630QM runs 8 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. This explains the i7-2630QM’s advantage in newer multi-threaded benchmarks that scale with thread count.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The N100 has a TDP of 6 watts, compared to 45 watts for the i7-2630QM. This is a 7.5x difference in thermal design power, making the N100 dramatically more suitable for fanless or low-power designs.

Q: What integrated graphics do they feature?

A: The N100 includes UHD Graphics 730, while the i7-2630QM has Intel HD 3000. The N100’s graphics are from a much newer generation, though the data does not include direct graphics benchmarks for either.

Q: Which processor is still in production?

A: The Intel Processor N100 is listed as Active, with a release date of January 2023 and a launch MSRP of $128. The Intel Core i7-2630QM is End-of-life, having launched in January 2011.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is vast. The N100 uses the Gracemont architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the i7-2630QM is built on Sandy Bridge using a 32 nm process. The N100’s process advantage allows for significantly lower power consumption and higher efficiency. The i7-2630QM has a larger physical footprint: its die size is 216 mm² and it contains 1,160 million transistors, whereas the N100 lists no die size or transistor count in the data.

Cache configurations differ notably. The N100 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i7-2630QM has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The N100’s L2 is shared across all cores, while the i7-2630QM has a larger per-core L2 allocation. The L3 sizes are identical at 6 MB.

Memory support separates them further. The N100 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a single-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The i7-2630QM lists dual-channel memory support but provides no bandwidth figure or specific memory types. The N100 also exposes PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the i7-2630QM lists no PCIe information. Both lack ECC memory support and both have locked multipliers.

The N100’s base clock is listed as 100.00, with a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The i7-2630QM has a base clock of 2000.00 and a boost of 2.90 GHz. The N100’s lower base clock reflects its power-focused design, while the i7-2630QM’s higher base clock suggests a more traditional performance orientation. The N100 belongs to the Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N) generation, while the i7-2630QM is a Core i7 from Sandy Bridge.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers three benchmarks, with the N100 winning two and the i7-2630QM taking one. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the N100 posts 401.5 against 304, a 32.1% victory. This is a substantial margin, showing that the modern Gracemont cores can outperform the older Sandy Bridge design even in a multi-threaded workload, likely due to higher IPC and better memory latency characteristics.

Cinebench R23 multicore flips the result. The i7-2630QM scores 3020, while the N100 manages 2559.5, giving the i7-2630QM a 15.2% lead. The difference here likely stems from thread count: the i7-2630QM has 8 threads versus 4 on the N100. The R23 workload scales well with additional threads, allowing the older chip to overcome its architectural disadvantage. The N100’s 4 threads can only do so much, even with superior per-core performance.

The single-core comparison is a rout. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the N100 scores 910.5 against 426 for the i7-2630QM, a 113.7% improvement. This is the largest delta in the entire dataset. The N100’s Gracemont cores deliver more than double the single-thread performance of Sandy Bridge, which reflects over a decade of microarchitecture improvements. The i7-2630QM’s Geekbench single-core score of 445 further illustrates its age, while the N100 has no Geekbench data listed for direct comparison.

Looking at the broader benchmark sets, the N100 shows strength across 3DMark tests, scoring 1243 in 16-thread, 694 in 2-thread, 1246 in 4-thread, 1250 in 8-thread, 1235 in max-thread, and 386 in single-thread. The i7-2630QM lacks 3DMark results entirely. The N100 also has Cinebench R15 single-core at 147.9, a test the i7-2630QM does not include. The i7-2630QM counters with Cinebench R20 scores (1268 multicore, 178 single-core) and Geekbench results (1393 multicore, 445 single-core), none of which appear for the N100.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. The N100 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-2630QM has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 100.00 MHz for the N100 and 2000.00 MHz for the i7-2630QM. Boost clocks are 3.40 GHz and 2.90 GHz respectively. TDP is a major separator: 6 watts for the N100, 45 watts for the i7-2630QM.

Sockets differ: the N100 uses Intel BGA 1264, while the i7-2630QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B). Architectures are Gracemont versus Sandy Bridge, with process nodes of 10 nm and 32 nm. The i7-2630QM lists transistors (1,160 million) and die size (216 mm²), while the N100 lists neither. L1 cache is 96 KB per core on the N100 versus 64 KB per core on the i7-2630QM. L2 is 2 MB shared versus 256 KB per core. L3 is 6 MB shared on both.

Memory support: the N100 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with single-channel memory and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-2630QM lists dual-channel memory but no specific types or bandwidth. PCIe: the N100 has Gen 3 with 9 lanes, the i7-2630QM has no listing. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 versus Intel HD 3000. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release dates: January 2023 versus January 2011. The N100 has a launch MSRP of $128, while the i7-2630QM has none listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Processor N100 wins in scenarios that favor modern efficiency and single-thread responsiveness. Its 6-watt TDP makes it ideal for lightweight laptops, mini PCs, and fanless designs where power draw and heat are critical constraints. The N100’s 113.7% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core means snappy application launches and responsive web browsing. Its 32.1% win in Cinebench R15 multicore also indicates that for older multi-threaded software, it can outperform the i7-2630QM despite having fewer threads. The N100’s DDR5 support and newer integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730) further suit modern, power-conscious daily drivers.

The Intel Core i7-2630QM wins where raw multi-threaded throughput in newer benchmarks matters most. Its 15.2% edge in Cinebench R23 multicore, driven by 8 threads, makes it better suited for heavily multithreaded content creation tasks that specifically use R23-style workloads. The i7-2630QM also has a Geekbench multicore score of 1393, which the N100 cannot match in the available data. Its dual-channel memory bus provides potentially higher memory bandwidth for memory-hungry applications, though the N100’s listed 38.4 GB/s figure is the only concrete bandwidth number in the pack. For users running software that scales beyond 4 threads, the i7-2630QM’s extra threads are a clear advantage.

The i7-2630QM’s 45-watt TDP, while inefficient by modern standards, indicates it was designed for sustained performance in larger laptops. Its transistor count of 1,160 million and 216 mm² die size suggest a more complex, power-hungry design that prioritized throughput over efficiency.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: choose the Intel Processor N100 for modern, power-efficient computing with strong single-thread performance. Its 6-watt TDP, active production status, and 113.7% single-core lead make it the obvious choice for current-generation laptops and compact devices. The N100’s 32.1% win in Cinebench R15 multicore further shows it can handle legacy multi-threaded software without issue. Its launch MSRP of $128 provides a reference point for its market position.

Choose the Intel Core i7-2630QM only if you specifically need more threads in newer multi-threaded benchmarks. Its 15.2% advantage in Cinebench R23 multicore and 8 threads give it an edge in that narrow scenario. However, its End-of-life status, 45-watt TDP, and 426 single-core score make it a poor fit for any modern use case. The i7-2630QM’s 32 nm process and 2011 release date place it firmly in a bygone era. With a 2.9 GHz boost clock and no launch MSRP listed, it offers no compelling reason for new purchases. The N100 wins the overall comparison with 2 head-to-head victories out of 3, and its architectural advantages make it the data-backed recommendation for virtually all buyers.