Intel Core i7-2720QM vs Intel Core i7-2860QM Comparison

Both processors are end-of-life mobile parts from Intel’s Sandy Bridge generation, built on the same 32nm process with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The Core i7-2860QM and Core i7-2720QM each offer 4 cores and 8 threads, but the 2860QM is the faster part in every single benchmark recorded. The data shows a clean sweep: 7 benchmark wins for the 2860QM, zero for the 2720QM. The 2860QM carries a 2.50 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost clock, while the 2720QM runs at 2.20 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost. Both share the same 45W TDP, dual-channel memory bus, and integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics. The key architectural difference beyond clocks is cache: the 2860QM has 8 MB of shared L3 cache versus 6 MB on the 2720QM. Socket layouts differ too, with the 2860QM using Intel Socket G2 (988B) and the 2720QM using Intel BGA 1224, which affects upgrade paths and system integration.

The Verdict

Pick the Intel Core i7-2860QM if benchmark performance is the sole criterion. It wins every head-to-head test in the data set, with margins ranging from 9.5% to 15.3% across Cinebench and Geekbench workloads. The 2860QM delivers 390 versus 344 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 1,626 versus 1,435 in R20 multi-core, and 3,873 versus 3,417 in R23 multi-core. Single-core results follow the same pattern: 229 versus 202 in R20, and 546 versus 482 in R23. In Geekbench, the 2860QM scores 1,681 multi-core and 558 single-core, compared to 1,535 and 484 for the 2720QM.

Choose the Intel Core i7-2720QM only if the platform dictates it. The 2720QM uses a different socket (Intel BGA 1224) compared to the 2860QM’s Socket G2 (988B), so system compatibility may force the choice. The 2720QM also has a lower average benchmark score of 1,128 versus 1,120 for the 2860QM, though both sit at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs. The 2720QM’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-3330S with an identical average score, while the 2860QM matches the AMD Athlon 240GE within 0.1%. For raw computing power, the 2860QM is the clear winner; for socket-matched upgrades, the 2720QM remains a viable but slower option.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are Sandy Bridge parts from the Core i7 generation, fabricated on Intel’s 32nm process at Intel’s own foundry. Transistor count is identical at 1,160 million, and die size matches at 216 mm². The core configuration is the same: 4 physical cores with Hyper-Threading for 8 threads. L1 cache is 64 KB per core and L2 cache is 256 KB per core on both. The L3 cache diverges: the 2860QM has 8 MB shared, while the 2720QM has 6 MB shared. That 2 MB difference can influence performance in cache-sensitive workloads, though clock speed is the more dominant factor here.

Clock speeds favor the 2860QM substantially. The base clock is 2.50 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, and boost reaches 3.60 GHz versus 3.30 GHz. Both have a 45W TDP, meaning the 2860QM extracts higher performance within the same thermal envelope. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both use a dual-channel memory bus. Integrated graphics are identical: Intel HD 3000. The market segment is mobile for both, and both are marked end-of-life. Release dates differ slightly: the 2860QM launched in September 2011, while the 2720QM launched in January 2011, making the 2720QM the earlier part.

Socket compatibility is a notable divergence. The 2860QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), a socketed package, while the 2720QM uses Intel BGA 1224, a ball-grid array soldered directly to the motherboard. This means the 2860QM can be replaced in a compatible socket, whereas the 2720QM is typically not user-serviceable. Part numbers also differ: SR02X for the 2860QM and SR00W for the 2720QM. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not a differentiator.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 2860QM wins every recorded benchmark, but the margins vary by workload. The largest advantage comes in Geekbench single-core, where the 2860QM scores 558 against 484, a 15.3% lead. That is the biggest delta in the entire comparison. Geekbench multi-core shows a smaller gap: 1,681 versus 1,535, a 9.5% difference. This suggests the 2860QM’s higher boost clock pays off more in lightly threaded tasks than in fully parallel ones.

Cinebench results cluster tightly around a 13.3–13.4% advantage. In R15 multi-core, the 2860QM hits 390 versus 344, a 13.4% lead. R20 multi-core shows 1,626 versus 1,435, also 13.3%. R23 multi-core follows at 3,873 versus 3,417, again 13.3%. Single-core Cinebench tests show the same pattern: R20 single-core is 229 versus 202 (13.4%), and R23 single-core is 546 versus 482 (13.3%). The consistency across Cinebench versions indicates a stable clock-driven advantage rather than workload-specific quirks.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The 2860QM averages 1,120, while the 2720QM averages 1,128. That puts the 2720QM marginally ahead on average, despite losing every individual head-to-head test. The reason lies in the nearest rivals: the 2720QM’s average is pulled up by its alignment with the Intel Core i5-3330S (1,128) and the Intel Core i7-3612QM (1,129), while the 2860QM sits near the AMD Athlon 240GE (1,121) and Intel Xeon D-1518 (1,121). Neither chip’s average score is a clean indicator of their relative performance in this direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-2860QM wins all multi-core tests. It scores 390 versus 344 in Cinebench R15, 1,626 versus 1,435 in R20, and 3,873 versus 3,417 in R23. Geekbench multi-core also favors the 2860QM at 1,681 versus 1,535.

Q: How much faster is the 2860QM in single-core tests?

A: The 2860QM leads by 15.3% in Geekbench single-core (558 versus 484) and by 13.4% in Cinebench R20 single-core (229 versus 202). Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 13.3% lead (546 versus 482).

Q: Do both CPUs have the same cache configuration?

A: No. The 2860QM has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 2720QM has 6 MB. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core, respectively.

Q: Are the sockets interchangeable?

A: No. The 2860QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), while the 2720QM uses Intel BGA 1224. These are physically different packages and are not compatible with each other’s motherboards.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The 2860QM has a 2.50 GHz base clock and 3.60 GHz boost, compared to 2.20 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost on the 2720QM. Both have a 45W TDP.

Q: Which chip has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The 2720QM has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 1,128, versus 1,120 for the 2860QM. Both sit at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2860QM wins in every benchmark category recorded. Its largest edge is in Geekbench single-core at 15.3%, making it the better choice for applications that rely on single-threaded responsiveness, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools. The 2860QM also wins all Cinebench multi-core tests by roughly 13.3%, so it handles rendering and video encoding workloads with a consistent advantage. The extra 2 MB of L3 cache and higher boost clock contribute to this across-the-board superiority.

The Intel Core i7-2720QM has no benchmark wins in this data set. Its only qualitative advantages are platform-related: the BGA 1224 socket may be the only option for certain pre-built laptops or compact systems where the 2860QM’s Socket G2 is not supported. The 2720QM also has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 1,128 versus 1,120, though this reflects its alignment with different rival chips rather than superior direct performance. For users locked into the BGA 1224 platform, the 2720QM is a functional but slower choice; for anyone with socket flexibility, the 2860QM is the faster pick in every measured workload.

The use-case split is clear. Choose the 2860QM for raw performance in both single-core and multi-core tasks, especially if you can leverage its 8 MB L3 cache and higher clocks. Choose the 2720QM only when motherboard compatibility or system design forces the BGA 1224 package. Both chips are end-of-life and share the same 45W TDP, integrated HD 3000 graphics, and dual-channel memory support, so the decision hinges on speed versus socket. Benchmark data leaves no ambiguity: the 2860QM is the better performer, and the 2720QM is the fallback option for platform-constrained builds.