Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms Core i7-7920HQ 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 i7-7920HQ.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-7920HQ
- 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 Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i7-7920HQ - 136 vs 129 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-7920HQ - 20 vs 8 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
136
100%
Value, £/FPS
£2.39/FPS
100%
Price, £
£325
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for £325 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 14190 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Mobile • Jan 3rd, 2017
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-7920HQ | 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 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
45 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
31.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |