Intel Core i7-4860HQ vs Intel Core i7-980 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent and unambiguous performance advantage for the Intel Core i7-980 across every single benchmark in the comparison. Out of six head-to-head tests, the i7-980 wins all six, while the i7-4860HQ records zero wins. This is not a close contest; the margins are remarkably uniform, with the i7-980 leading by approximately 9.5% to 9.6% in every single test.

Looking at the multi-core results, the i7-980 scores 589 in Cinebench R15 multicore, compared to 533 for the i7-4860HQ, representing a 9.5% deficit for the mobile chip. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the i7-980 posts 2458 against 2224, again a 9.5% gap. The trend continues in Cinebench R23 multicore with 5853 versus 5297, a 9.5% difference. The consistency of these margins suggests a fixed architectural or frequency advantage that scales linearly across workloads.

Single-core performance tells the same story. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i7-980 scores 83 versus 75, a 9.6% lead. In R20 single-core, the gap is 346 versus 313, which is 9.5%. In R23 single-core, the i7-980 reaches 826 while the i7-4860HQ manages 747, again a 9.6% difference. The fact that the single-core and multi-core deltas are nearly identical indicates that the i7-980's advantage is not tied to its extra cores, but is instead a per-thread performance edge.

The aggregate benchmark scores corroborate this. The i7-4860HQ has an average benchmark score of 1720, while the i7-980 averages 1693. In the database's nearest rivals list, the i7-4860HQ sits at the 41st percentile of all CPUs, with rivals such as the AMD Athlon Gold PRO 3150GE (average score 1722, delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core i7-4910MQ (1716, delta 0.3%). The i7-980 holds the 40th percentile, with the AMD Ryzen 7 3750H (1690, delta 0.2%) and the Intel Core i7-3770K (1688, delta 0.3%) as close neighbors. These percentile rankings are nearly identical, meaning that despite the i7-980's clear head-to-head sweep, the two chips occupy essentially the same tier when compared against the full CPU landscape.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and are built for different platforms. The Intel Core i7-4860HQ uses the Haswell architecture, specifically the Crystalwell codename, and is fabricated on a 22 nm process node. It contains 1,400 million transistors on a 264 mm² die. The Intel Core i7-980 uses the Westmere architecture, codename Gulftown, built on a 32 nm process. It has 1,170 million transistors but a smaller die size of 239 mm². The newer 22nm process is denser, which explains how the i7-4860HQ fits more transistors into a larger die area.

Core and thread counts differ substantially. The i7-4860HQ has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i7-980 has 6 cores and 12 threads. This is a 50% advantage in both cores and threads for the i7-980, yet this does not translate into a 50% performance advantage in benchmarks, indicating that the per-core efficiency of the Haswell architecture partially compensates for the raw core count deficit.

Cache sizes are also different. Both chips have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, so the per-core cache hierarchy is identical. The shared L3 cache, however, is 6 MB on the i7-4860HQ and 12 MB on the i7-980. This means the i7-980 has twice as much last-level cache, which is a significant advantage in workloads that benefit from larger shared pools.

The i7-4860HQ is a mobile part, using the Intel BGA 1364 socket, while the i7-980 is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1366. The i7-4860HQ has integrated graphics (Intel HD 5200), while the i7-980 has no integrated graphics at all. The mobile chip also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the desktop i7-980 supports PCIe Gen 2 with no specific lane count listed.

Where Each One Wins

Based purely on the benchmark data, the Intel Core i7-980 wins every single test where both were measured. There is no benchmark category in which the i7-4860HQ comes out ahead. This means for any workload that is represented by Cinebench R15, R20, or R23, whether single-core or multi-core, the i7-980 is the faster processor.

However, the context of each chip matters. The i7-4860HQ is a mobile processor, designed for laptops, with a 47W thermal design power (TDP). The i7-980 is a desktop processor with a 130W TDP. The i7-980's wins are achieved at nearly three times the power envelope, which is not a surprise given the extra cores and higher base clock. The i7-4860HQ's only redeeming factors in the database are its integrated graphics, its 22nm process node, and its lower TDP, but these are not reflected in the benchmark scores.

For users who require a CPU for a desktop system with a dedicated graphics card, the i7-980 is the clear winner in processing power. For users who need a mobile solution with built-in display output, the i7-4860HQ offers a functional, if slower, alternative. The data does not show any workload where the i7-4860HQ's architectural advantages (e.g., the newer process node) translate into a benchmark win.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two processors are as follows:

• Cores: 4 (i7-4860HQ) vs 6 (i7-980)
• Threads: 8 vs 12
• Base clock: 2.40 GHz vs 3.33 GHz
• Boost clock: 3.60 GHz for both (same)
• TDP: 47W vs 130W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1364 vs Intel Socket 1366
• Architecture: Haswell (Crystalwell) vs Westmere (Gulftown)
• Process node: 22 nm vs 32 nm
• Transistors: 1,400 million vs 1,170 million
• Die size: 264 mm² vs 239 mm²
• L3 cache: 6 MB vs 12 MB
• Memory bus: Dual-channel vs Triple-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 25.6 GB/s vs not listed
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) vs Gen 2
• Integrated graphics: Intel HD 5200 vs none
• Market segment: Mobile vs Desktop
• Part number: SR1BP vs SLBYU

Both chips support DDR3 memory, do not support ECC, have unlocked multipliers, and are end-of-life. The i7-4860HQ was released in 2014-01-31, while the i7-980 was released in 2011-06-25. Neither has a launch MSRP listed in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-980 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i7-4860HQ has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The i7-4860HQ has a TDP of 47W, while the i7-980 has a TDP of 130W.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The i7-980 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, which is twice the 6 MB on the i7-4860HQ.

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R20 multicore?

A: The i7-980 scores 2458, which is 9.5% higher than the i7-4860HQ's score of 2224.

Q: Are both processors unlocked?

A: No, both have multiplier unlocked false in the database.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The i7-4860HQ has Intel HD 5200 integrated graphics, while the i7-980 has no integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the Intel Core i7-980 is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded, with a consistent 9.5% lead over the i7-4860HQ. This is the case for both single-core and multi-core tests, meaning that the i7-980's advantage does not depend on the workload. Its 6 cores, 12 threads, and 12 MB of L3 cache give it a structural edge that the newer Haswell architecture cannot overcome in these tests.

However, the i7-980's wins come with a significant cost in power and form factor. It consumes 130W versus the i7-4860HQ's 47W, and it is a desktop part for Socket 1366, requiring a large system. The i7-4860HQ, being a mobile BGA 1364 part with integrated graphics and 25.6 GB/s dual-channel memory bandwidth, is designed for portability, not raw throughput. The data shows that the i7-980 is the right choice for a stationary desktop builds, while the i7-4860HQ is the only reasonable choice for a mobile or compact system, despite its lower performance.

The aggregate scores are nearly identical, with the i7-4860HQ at 1720 and the i7-980 at 1693, and both hover around the 40th percentile of all CPUs. This suggests that in the broader context, the two chips are equivalent in overall tier, but the i7-980 is simply faster in every direct comparison.