A10-9700 vs Core i7-2635QM

CPU

GPU

A10-9700

4 Cores4 Thrd65 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2017

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Core i7-2635QM

4 Cores8 Thrd45 WWMax: 2.9 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A10-9700 vs Core i7-2635QM Performance Spectrum

A10-9700

4 / 4

3,555

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-2635QM

4 / 8

3,541

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A10-9700 vs Core i7-2635QM FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A10-9700 vs Core i7-2635QM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A10-9700

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $209 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
✅Delivers 124.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 21.0 vs 9.4 PassMark/$ ($169 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-2635QM.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-2635QM across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.

Core i7-2635QM

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,541 vs 3,555).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.4 vs 21.0 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-9700.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-9700 better than Core i7-2635QM?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-2635QM is ahead with a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A10-9700 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A10-9700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A10-9700 is the better buy right now. A10-9700 comes in $209 cheaper on MSRP at $169 MSRP versus $378 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core i7-2635QM is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 124.6% better value on MSRP (21.0 vs 9.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A10-9700 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A10-9700 vs Core i7-2635QM Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-9700

The A10-9700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,555 points. Launch price was $90.

Core i7-2635QM

The Core i7-2635QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1224. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 3,541 points. Launch price was $378.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-9700 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Core i7-2635QM's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the A10-9700 versus 2.9 GHz on the Core i7-2635QM — a 26.9% clock advantage for the A10-9700 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The A10-9700 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i7-2635QM uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A10-9700 scores 3,555 against the Core i7-2635QM's 3,541 — a 0.4% lead for the A10-9700. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-9700 vs 6 MB (total) on the Core i7-2635QM.

Feature	A10-9700	Core i7-2635QM
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+31%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+75%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2048 kB+700%	256K (per core)
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	3,555	3,541
Geekbench 6 Single	642	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-9700 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-2635QM uses FCBGA1224 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the A10-9700 versus DDR3-1333 on the Core i7-2635QM — the A10-9700 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A10-9700 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A10-9700) vs 16 (Core i7-2635QM) — the Core i7-2635QM offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A10-9700	Core i7-2635QM
Socket	AM4	FCBGA1224
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+80%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+300%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A10-9700) vs VT-x (Core i7-2635QM). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R7 (A10-9700) and HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2635QM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-9700 targets Budget, Core i7-2635QM targets Mobile. Direct competitor: A10-9700 rivals Pentium G4560.

Feature	A10-9700	Core i7-2635QM
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon R7	HD Graphics 3000
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x
Target Use	Budget	Mobile

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A10-9700 was priced at $169, while the Core i7-2635QM came in at $378. On launch pricing ($169 vs $378), A10-9700 was $209 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A10-9700 delivers 21.0 pts/$ vs 9.4 pts/$ for the Core i7-2635QM — making the A10-9700 the 76.8% better value option.

Feature	A10-9700	Core i7-2635QM
MSRP	$169-55%	$378
Performance per Dollar	21.0+123%	9.4
Release Date	2017	2011

Search A10-9700 on Amazon

Search Core i7-2635QM on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.