Core i7-2635QM vs A10-9700
Core i7-2635QM
A10-9700
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Core i7-2635QM is positioned at rank 1096 and the A10-9700 is on rank 771, so the A10-9700 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core i7-2635QM
Performance Per Dollar A10-9700
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core i7-2635QM | A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($378) | ✅ More affordable ($40) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | ✨ Modern (Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) / 28 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core i7-2635QM | A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+849%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($378) | ✅ More affordable ($40) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-2635QM and A10-9700
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.
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.
Processing Power
The Core i7-2635QM packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the A10-9700's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Core i7-2635QM versus 3.8 GHz on the A10-9700 — a 26.9% clock advantage for the A10-9700 (base: 2 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i7-2635QM uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the A10-9700 uses Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2635QM scores 3,541 against the A10-9700's 3,555 — a 0.4% lead for the A10-9700. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Core i7-2635QM vs 0 kB on the A10-9700.
| Feature | Core i7-2635QM | A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 8 | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.8 GHz+31% |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | 3.5 GHz+75% |
| L3 Cache | 6 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 2048 kB+700% |
| Process | 32 nm | 28 nm-13% |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) |
| PassMark | 3,541 | 3,555 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 642 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-2635QM uses the FCBGA1224 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the A10-9700 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Core i7-2635QM versus DDR4-2400 on the A10-9700 — the A10-9700 supports 28.6% 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 — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-2635QM) vs 8 (A10-9700) — the Core i7-2635QM offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Core i7-2635QM | A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1224 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR4-2400+33% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 64 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16+100% | 8 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core i7-2635QM) vs AMD-V (A10-9700). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2635QM) and Radeon R7 (A10-9700) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2635QM targets Mobile, A10-9700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-9700 rivals Pentium G4560.
| Feature | Core i7-2635QM | A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 3000 | Radeon R7 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Mobile | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Core i7-2635QM launched at $378 MSRP, while the A10-9700 debuted at $169.
| Feature | Core i7-2635QM | A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $378 | $169-55% |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $40 |
| Release Date | 2011 | 2017 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i7-2635QM and A10-9700
