Intel Core i7-2635QM vs Intel Core i7-880 Comparison

Intel Core i7-880 and Intel Core i7-2635QM are both quad-core, eight-thread processors from Intel, but they come from different eras and target different platforms. The i7-880 is a desktop Lynnfield part built on the Nehalem architecture, while the i7-2635QM is a mobile Sandy Bridge chip. The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the newer mobile chip, yet the margins are surprisingly narrow. Every head-to-head benchmark in the database favors the i7-2635QM, but the largest advantage is just over two percent. This is not a case of one chip dominating the other; it is a case of a newer architecture squeezing out consistent, small wins across the board.

The i7-880 reaches a base clock of 3.07 GHz and a boost clock of 3.73 GHz, while the i7-2635QM operates at 2000.00 MHz base and 2.90 GHz boost. On paper, the desktop chip has a substantial frequency advantage. The data, however, tells a different story. The i7-2635QM wins every Cinebench test despite the lower clocks. That suggests architectural efficiency from Sandy Bridge more than compensates for the clock deficit. The mobile chip also has access to a more modern process node, 32 nm versus 45 nm, which may influence power characteristics and thermal behavior, though the database does not link those directly to the benchmark results.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-2635QM wins all five recorded comparisons. That covers Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 singlecore, R23 multicore, and R23 singlecore. The i7-880 does not win a single benchmark in the database. This is not a close split where each processor takes different workloads; the mobile Sandy Bridge chip is ahead in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks.

The margins are small but consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-2635QM scores 301 against 294 for the i7-880, a difference of 2.3 percent. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the scores are 1257 and 1227, again a 2.4 percent gap. The singlecore results follow the same pattern: 177 versus 173 in R20 singlecore and 422 versus 412 in R23 singlecore, both roughly 2.3 to 2.4 percent apart. The R23 multicore result repeats the trend with 2995 against 2923.

The i7-880 does have one notable advantage in the specification data: its L3 cache is 8 MB shared, while the i7-2635QM has 6 MB shared. It also has a higher base and boost clock. Those attributes do not translate into wins in the measured benchmarks. The i7-2635QM compensates with a newer architecture, a smaller process node, and a lower thermal design power of 45 watts against 95 watts for the i7-880. The data indicates that architectural improvements in Sandy Bridge deliver better performance per clock, enough to overcome a significant clock disadvantage.

The average benchmark scores also favor the i7-2635QM slightly. The i7-880 has an average benchmark score of 1006, while the i7-2635QM sits at 995. That is a small difference, and both processors occupy the 27th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the i7-880 include the Intel Core i5-10210Y and AMD FX-9830P, both with an average score of 1006, and the Intel Core i7-2630QM at 1005. The i7-2635QM sits alongside the Intel Core i7-2920XM and AMD Opteron 4226 at 995, with the Intel Core i3-8130U close behind at 994. These clustering patterns suggest both chips occupy a similar performance tier, despite their different platforms and release dates.

The Verdict

For a desktop user comparing these two, the data does not support the i7-880 as the stronger performer in the measured workloads. The i7-2635QM wins every benchmark, even though it is a mobile part with lower clock speeds. The differences are small, but they are consistent across both singlecore and multicore tests. If the selection is based purely on the recorded Cinebench results, the i7-2635QM is the better choice.

The i7-880 is not without its own merits. It offers a larger shared L3 cache of 8 MB, a higher base clock of 3.07 GHz, and a boost clock of 3.73 GHz. It also uses the Intel Socket 1156 platform, which is a desktop socket with PCIe Gen 2 support and 16 lanes from the CPU. The i7-2635QM uses a different socket, Intel BGA 1224, which is a mobile package. The i7-2635QM also includes integrated graphics in the form of Intel HD 3000, while the i7-880 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

The practical choice depends on platform. The i7-2635QM is a mobile processor, so it belongs in a laptop or a system built around a BGA 1224 board. The i7-880 is a desktop chip for Socket 1156. Users who already have a Socket 1156 motherboard may find the i7-880 a reasonable option, but the benchmark data shows it trails the i7-2635QM in every recorded test. The performance gap is not large enough to be a deciding factor in most real-world use, but the data is clear.

The i7-2635QM also has a substantially lower TDP of 45 watts compared to 95 watts for the i7-880. For mobile systems, that is a significant advantage. The database does not record battery life or thermal performance, but the power envelope difference is part of the specification data and cannot be ignored. The i7-2635QM delivers slightly better benchmark scores while drawing less than half the power budget. That makes it the stronger choice in any scenario where power efficiency matters.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the i7-2635QM at 301 points against 294 for the i7-880. The 2.3 percent gap is the smallest margin in the dataset. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the i7-2635QM scores 1257, beating 1227. The R20 singlecore test gives the mobile chip 177 against 173. The R23 multicore test shows 2995 versus 2923, and the R23 singlecore test shows 422 versus 412. Every result favors the i7-2635QM, and every difference falls between 2.3 and 2.4 percent.

The consistency of the margins is notable. Across five different tests, the delta never strays far from 2.3 percent. That suggests the performance difference is not workload-dependent; it is a uniform architectural advantage. The i7-2635QM is not faster in one specific task; it is slightly faster in all of them. This is typical of a generational improvement where the newer core design simply executes instructions more efficiently.

The i7-880 does have a higher boost clock, 3.73 GHz versus 2.90 GHz, and a higher base clock, 3.07 GHz versus 2000.00 MHz. Despite that, it loses the singlecore tests by roughly 2.3 percent. This is a strong indicator that the Sandy Bridge core in the i7-2635QM has better instructions per clock, or IPC, than the Nehalem core in the i7-880. The database does not directly measure IPC, but the clock and frequency data combined with the benchmark results support that interpretation.

The i7-2635QM also has a Geekbench result in the database, with 1371 in multicore and 442 in singlecore. The i7-880 does not have corresponding Geekbench entries, so a direct comparison on that test is not possible. The absence of that data limits the scope of the comparison, but the Cinebench results provide enough evidence to determine the overall trend.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks in the database?

A: The Intel Core i7-2635QM wins all five head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core i7-880 does not win any of the recorded tests.

Q: How large is the performance difference between the two processors?

A: The i7-2635QM leads by 2.3 percent in Cinebench R15 multicore and R20 singlecore, and by 2.4 percent in Cinebench R20 multicore, R23 multicore, and R23 singlecore.

Q: Does the i7-880 have a higher clock speed?

A: Yes, the i7-880 has a base clock of 3.07 GHz and a boost clock of 3.73 GHz, while the i7-2635QM has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 2.90 GHz.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The i7-880 has a TDP of 95 watts, while the i7-2635QM has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The i7-2635QM includes Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics. The i7-880 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Architecture Differences

The i7-880 is based on the Nehalem architecture with the codename Lynnfield, built on a 45 nm process node. It uses the Intel Socket 1156 platform and is classified as a desktop processor. The i7-2635QM is based on Sandy Bridge, built on a 32 nm process node, and uses the Intel BGA 1224 socket for mobile systems. The process node difference is significant: 45 nm versus 32 nm allows the Sandy Bridge chip to pack more transistors into a smaller die. The i7-2635QM has 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die, while the i7-880 has 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die.

The cache configurations also differ. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache is where they diverge, with the i7-880 offering 8 MB shared and the i7-2635QM offering 6 MB shared. The i7-880 also supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel memory bus, and the i7-2635QM also has a dual-channel memory bus, with its memory support field left unspecified in the database. The i7-2635QM is the only one of the two with integrated graphics, featuring Intel HD 3000.

The i7-880 includes PCIe Gen 2 support with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-2635QM has no PCIe information recorded. The i7-880 is a desktop part from the Lynnfield generation, released in 2010, while the i7-2635QM is a mobile part from the Sandy Bridge generation, released in 2011. Both are end-of-life products with locked multipliers. The part numbers are SLBPS for the i7-880 and SR030 for the i7-2635QM.

Specification Differences

The base clock differs significantly: the i7-880 runs at 3.07 GHz, while the i7-2635QM runs at 2000.00 MHz. The boost clock also favors the i7-880, 3.73 GHz versus 2.90 GHz. The TDP is a major difference, with the i7-880 rated at 95 watts and the i7-2635QM at 45 watts. The socket types are different, with the i7-880 using Intel Socket 1156 and the i7-2635QM using Intel BGA 1224.

The process node is 45 nm for the i7-880 and 32 nm for the i7-2635QM. Transistor counts are 774 million and 1,160 million respectively, while die sizes are 296 mm² and 216 mm². Shared L3 cache is 8 MB for the i7-880 and 6 MB for the i7-2635QM. The i7-880 has PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-2635QM has no PCIe data recorded. Integrated graphics are present only in the i7-2635QM, with Intel HD 3000. The market segments differ, with the i7-880 listed as Desktop and the i7-2635QM as Mobile. The release dates are 2010 for the i7-880 and 2011 for the i7-2635QM. Both processors are end-of-life, both have locked multipliers, and both lack ECC memory support.