Core i3-390M vs Core i7-660UM

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.

Core i3-390M vs Core i7-660UM 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.

Core i3-390M vs Core i7-660UM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-390M

2011

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌2744.4% higher power demand at 512W vs 18W.

Core i7-660UM

2010

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 18W instead of 512W, a 494W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,279 vs 1,292).
❌Launch MSRP is still $317 MSRP, while Core i3-390M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-660UM better than Core i3-390M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-660UM is ahead with a 0.8% average FPS lead across 45 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark. Core i7-660UM also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i7-660UM is the better buy right now. Core i7-660UM comes in at an unclear MSRP at $317 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.8% average FPS lead across 45 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i3-390M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-390M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-390M vs Core i7-660UM Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-390M

The Core i3-390M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 0.67 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,292 points. Launch price was $39.

Core i7-660UM

The Core i7-660UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.33 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,279 points. Launch price was $317.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-390M and Core i7-660UM share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 0.67 GHz on the Core i3-390M versus 2.4 GHz on the Core i7-660UM — a 112.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-660UM (base: 2.66 GHz vs 1.33 GHz). Both are built on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture using a 32 nm process. In PassMark, the Core i3-390M scores 1,292 against the Core i7-660UM's 1,279 — a 1% lead for the Core i3-390M. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-390M vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-660UM.

Feature	Core i3-390M	Core i7-660UM
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	0.67 GHz	2.4 GHz+258%
Base Clock	2.66 GHz+100%	1.33 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	4 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Arrandale (2010−2011)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,292+1%	1,279
Geekbench 6 Single	—	250
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	600

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-390M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-660UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	Core i3-390M	Core i7-660UM
Socket	PGA988	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core i3-390M) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-660UM). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics (Core i3-390M) and HD Graphics (Core i7-660UM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-390M targets Mobile, Core i7-660UM targets Budget.