Core i3-7300 vs Core i7-2860QM

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 i3-7300 vs Core i7-2860QM 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 i3-7300 vs Core i7-2860QM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-7300

2017

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-2860QM across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,519 vs 4,597).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $184 MSRP, while Core i7-2860QM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Core i7-2860QM

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Draws 45W instead of 51W, a 6W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-2860QM better than Core i3-7300?

Yes. Core i7-2860QM is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-2860QM is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2860QM is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

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

Core i7-2860QM is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i7-2860QM comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $184 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-7300 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2017 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (24.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.

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

Core i3-7300 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-7300 vs Core i7-2860QM Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-7300

The Core i3-7300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 51 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,519 points. Launch price was $147.

Core i7-2860QM

The Core i7-2860QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 September 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 4,597 points. Launch price was $568.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-7300 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i7-2860QM offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i7-2860QM has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Core i3-7300 versus 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-2860QM — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Core i3-7300 (base: 4 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core i3-7300 uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-2860QM uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-7300 scores 4,519 against the Core i7-2860QM's 4,597 — a 1.7% lead for the Core i7-2860QM. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-7300 vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-2860QM.

Feature	Core i3-7300	Core i7-2860QM
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 8+100%
Boost Clock	4 GHz+11%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	4 GHz+60%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	8 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	4,519	4,597+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-7300 uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-2860QM uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Core i3-7300 versus 1600 on the Core i7-2860QM — the Core i3-7300 supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-7300 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	Core i3-7300	Core i7-2860QM
Socket	LGA1151	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+50%	1600
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+100%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-7300) vs true (Core i7-2860QM). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 630 (Core i3-7300) and Intel HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2860QM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-7300 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i7-2860QM rivals AMD A8-3510MX.