Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms Core i7-7820HQ on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 1213 days newer than Core i7-7820HQ.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-7820HQ
- Consumes up to 31% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900F - 45 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 5% better in Ready or Not than Core i7-7820HQ - 274 vs 260 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-7820HQ - 20 vs 8 threads
Ready or Not
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
274
100%
Value, £/FPS
£0.91/FPS
100%
Price, £
£249.99
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £249.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Mobile • Jan 3rd, 2017
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-7820HQ | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i7 | Collection | Core i9 |
Kaby Lake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel BGA 1440 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 10 |
8 | Threads | 20 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
45 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |