Intel Core i7-2920XM vs Intel Core i7-960 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-2920XM is the clear victor in this head-to-head comparison, outperforming the Intel Core i7-960 across every single benchmark where both processors were tested. The data shows a consistent and significant margin of victory for the mobile Sandy Bridge part, with the i7-2920XM winning all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons. While both processors share the same 27th percentile ranking among all CPUs, the i7-2920XM achieves an average benchmark score of 995 compared to the i7-960’s 993, a narrow but telling overall difference that underscores its edge.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the data is the uniformity of the i7-2920XM’s advantage across all tested workloads. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the i7-2920XM scores 353 against the i7-960’s 290, a delta of 21.7%. This is not a marginal win; it represents a substantial performance gap that persists in every subsequent test.

The Cinebench R20 results reinforce this trend. In the multi-core test, the i7-2920XM posts 1471 versus 1211 for the i7-960, a 21.5% advantage. The single-core R20 test shows a similar story, with the i7-2920XM at 207 and the i7-960 at 170, translating to a 21.8% delta. This near-identical percentage across both single and multi-threaded workloads suggests that the i7-2920XM’s architectural improvements benefit all types of processing, not just parallel tasks.

Moving to the more demanding Cinebench R23 benchmark, the results remain consistent. The i7-2920XM scores 3504 in multi-core, while the i7-960 manages 2885, a 21.5% delta. In single-core R23, the i7-2920XM achieves 494 against the i7-960’s 407, a 21.4% advantage. The consistency of these deltas, hovering between 21.4% and 21.8%, indicates a fundamental per-clock efficiency advantage for the i7-2920XM, rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The i7-2920XM also holds benchmark results that were not directly compared head-to-head but are part of its benchmark suite. It records a Geekbench multi-core score of 1452 and a single-core score of 430. Additionally, it has a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 52. These extra data points do not change the overall conclusion: the i7-2920XM is faster in every measurable way.

It is worth remembering the i7-960’s higher base clock of 3.20 GHz compared to the i7-2920XM’s 2.50 GHz does not translate into a performance win. The i7-2920XM’s boost clock of 3.50 GHz, when combined with its newer architecture, is more than enough to overcome the clock deficit. In fact, the i7-2920XM’s boost clock is only slightly higher than the i7-960’s boost clock of 3.47 GHz, yet the performance gap remains substantial, pointing squarely at architectural efficiency as the deciding factor.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-2920XM is the superior processor in every benchmark category tested. Anyone prioritizing raw performance should choose the i7-2920XM without hesitation. The five head-to-head wins for the i7-2920XM, with zero for the i7-960, leave no room for interpretation.

Specifically, the i7-2920XM is the pick for users who run multi-threaded applications like video rendering or 3D modeling, where its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 3504 provides a 21.5% advantage over the i7-960. It is equally strong for single-threaded tasks, such as older games or lightly-threaded productivity software, where its R23 single-core score of 494 leads by 21.4%.

The i7-960, despite its higher base clock, is the weaker choice across the board. Its best showing is in the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, where it still loses by 21.7%. There are no benchmark results in the FACT PACK where the i7-960 wins. For users constrained to the Intel Socket 1366 platform, the i7-960 remains a serviceable quad-core, but it is outperformed by the i7-2920XM in every scenario measured.

One caveat: the i7-2920XM is a mobile processor with a 55 W TDP, while the i7-960 is a desktop part with a 130 W TDP. The performance advantage of the i7-2920XM comes despite consuming less than half the power budget, making it the more efficient choice as well. The i7-2920XM also features an unlocked multiplier, offering overclocking potential that the locked i7-960 lacks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-2920XM has an average benchmark score of 995, while the Intel Core i7-960 has an average score of 993.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i7-2920XM scores 3504, and the i7-960 scores 2885, giving the i7-2920XM a 21.5% advantage.

Q: Does the i7-960 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i7-2920XM winning all five comparisons, with the i7-960 recording zero wins.

Q: How do their memory channels differ?

A: The i7-2920XM supports dual-channel memory, while the i7-960 supports triple-channel memory.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The i7-2920XM is built on a 32 nm process, while the i7-960 uses a 45 nm process.

Q: Do both processors have the same L3 cache size?

A: Yes. Both the i7-2920XM and the i7-960 have 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications beyond their performance. The i7-2920XM has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, while the i7-960 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.47 GHz. The i7-960 starts with a higher base clock, but the i7-2920XM reaches a slightly higher boost frequency.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The i7-2920XM has a TDP of 55 W, whereas the i7-960 has a TDP of 130 W. This makes the i7-2920XM far more power-efficient, which is notable given its superior performance.

The sockets are incompatible. The i7-2920XM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), designed for mobile platforms, while the i7-960 uses Intel Socket 1366 for desktop systems. The i7-2920XM is classified as a mobile processor, while the i7-960 is a desktop part.

Memory support also differs. The i7-2920XM supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The i7-960 supports triple-channel DDR3 memory, though its bandwidth is not listed in the data.

The i7-2920XM includes integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics, while the i7-960 has no integrated graphics. The i7-2920XM also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for easier overclocking, while the i7-960’s multiplier is locked.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is significant. The i7-2920XM is based on the Sandy Bridge architecture, while the i7-960 is based on the older Nehalem architecture, with the codename Bloomfield. This generational difference explains much of the performance delta.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The i7-2920XM uses a 32 nm process, while the i7-960 uses a 45 nm process. The i7-2920XM packs 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die, whereas the i7-960 has 731 million transistors on a larger 263 mm² die. The newer, denser process contributes to the i7-2920XM’s higher efficiency and performance.

Both processors have four cores and eight threads, with identical L1 and L2 cache configurations: 64 KB per core and 256 KB per core, respectively. Both also share 8 MB of L3 cache. The core and cache layout is the same on paper, but the Sandy Bridge architecture implements these resources more efficiently.

The i7-2920XM supports PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-960 supports PCIe Gen 2 without a specified lane count. The i7-2920XM also includes integrated graphics, a feature entirely absent from the i7-960. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The i7-2920XM is part of the Core i7 Extreme line for Sandy Bridge, while the i7-960 belongs to the Core i7 Bloomfield generation. The release dates differ, with the i7-2920XM launching in January 2011 and the i7-960 in October 2009.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-2920XM wins in every benchmark category recorded. Its strengths are most pronounced in multi-threaded workloads, where its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 3504 demonstrates a clear advantage. This makes it the better choice for video editing, 3D rendering, and other heavily parallel tasks, provided the mobile platform is acceptable.

The i7-2920XM also excels in single-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 494. This benefits everyday responsiveness, older applications, and tasks that rely on a single core. Its integrated Intel HD 3000 graphics offer a basic display output capability that the i7-960 completely lacks, which is useful for systems without a discrete GPU.

The i7-960’s only potential advantage lies in its platform. Being a desktop processor on Socket 1366, it is designed for full-sized systems with robust cooling. Its higher base clock of 3.20 GHz might appeal in scenarios where boost clocks are not sustained, but the benchmark data shows no such advantage materializing. The i7-960 wins zero head-to-head benchmarks, so there is no performance scenario where it comes out ahead.

For users building a desktop system with an existing Socket 1366 motherboard, the i7-960 remains a functional quad-core option. However, it is slower, consumes more power, and lacks integrated graphics. The i7-2920XM is the superior processor in absolute performance, efficiency, and features, making it the clear recommendation based strictly on the data.