In Atomfall, the Core i3-3220T is slightly slower than the Core i7-4900MQ. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-3220T
- Consumes up to 26% less energy – 35 vs 47 Watts
- Consumes up to 26% less energy
Core i7-4900MQ
- Up to 9% faster in Atomfall – 203 vs 186 FPS
- Up to 9% faster in Atomfall
- Is 8 months and 28 days newer – Jun 02, 2013 vs Sep 03, 2012
- Is 8 months and 28 days newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i3-3220T vs Core i7-4900MQ: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-3220T
Sep 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
186 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
92%
Price, $
$189.95
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.02/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3220T vs Core i7-4900MQ in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3220T vs Core i7-4900MQ in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3220T
Sep 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
3 MB
38%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i7-4900MQ
Jun 2nd, 2013
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1600 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3220T Sep 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i7-4900MQ Jun 2nd, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 3rd, 2012 | Released | Jun 2nd, 2013 |
| – | MSRP | $570.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGAG3 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 47 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 1600 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD 2500 | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 4600 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
