Core i7-2640M vs Core i7-3667U

Core i7-2640M

2 Cores4 Thrd35 WWMax: 3.5 GHz2011

Core i7-3667U

2 Cores4 Thrd512 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2012

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-2640M

2 / 4

2,445

0.0%

2,451

+0.2%

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 i7-2640M is positioned at rank 1159 and the Core i7-3667U is on rank 1197, so the Core i7-2640M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core i7-2640M

#1147

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4150%

#1148

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4089%

#1149

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3754%

#1150

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3737%

#1151

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3703%

#1153

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3576%

#1154

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3429%

#1155

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3423%

#1156

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3331%

#1159

Core i7-2640M

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

100%

#1161

Core M-5Y71

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

99%

#1162

Core i7-2620M

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

99%

#1164

Celeron N3010

MSRP: $107|Avg: N/A

97%

#1165

Core i7-3537U

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

96%

#1166

Core M-5Y10a

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

96%

#1167

Core M-5Y31

MSRP: $281|Avg: $30

96%

#1168

Core M-5Y10c

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

96%

#1170

Celeron 1047UE

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

95%

#1171

Core M-5Y70

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

95%

#1172

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

95%

#1173

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

94%

#1174

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

94%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core i7-3667U

#1184

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

5383%

#1185

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

5305%

#1186

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

4870%

#1187

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

4848%

#1188

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

4803%

#1190

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

4639%

#1191

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

4448%

#1192

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

4440%

#1193

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

4321%

#1197

Core i7-3667U

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#1198

Celeron 560

MSRP: $89|Avg: $5

98%

#1199

Core i3-2312M

MSRP: $225|Avg: N/A

97%

#1200

Celeron 857

MSRP: $134|Avg: $10

97%

#1201

Celeron 925

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

96%

#1202

Core 2 Duo E8135

MSRP: $200|Avg: $15

94%

#1203

Core 2 Duo U7700

MSRP: $262|Avg: $10

94%

#1204

Core Duo T2400

MSRP: $294|Avg: N/A

93%

#1205

Core 2 Duo U7600

MSRP: $250|Avg: $5

93%

#1206

Pentium M 735

MSRP: $294|Avg: N/A

91%

#1207

Core i7-620LM

MSRP: $300|Avg: N/A

90%

#1208

Core i7-740QM

MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A

89%

#1210

Core 2 Solo SU3300

MSRP: $262|Avg: $50

87%

#1211

Celeron 540

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

87%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The Core i7-2640M leads in gaming performance. However, the Core i7-3667U is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 0.2% greater multi-core processing power.

Insight	Core i7-2640M	Core i7-3667U
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($346)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) / 22 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Insight	Core i7-2640M	Core i7-3667U
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($346)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i7-2640M Benchmark Check

Core i7-3667U Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-2640M and Core i7-3667U

Core i7-2640M

The Core i7-2640M 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 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,445 points. Launch price was $346.

Core i7-3667U

The Core i7-3667U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,451 points. Launch price was $346.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-2640M and Core i7-3667U share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the Core i7-2640M versus 3.2 GHz on the Core i7-3667U — a 9% clock advantage for the Core i7-2640M (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i7-2640M uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i7-3667U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2640M scores 2,445 against the Core i7-3667U's 2,451 — a 0.2% lead for the Core i7-3667U. L3 cache: 4 MB on the Core i7-2640M vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-3667U.

Feature	Core i7-2640M	Core i7-3667U
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz+9%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+40%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB+100%	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,445	2,451
Geekbench 6 Single	563	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,184	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2640M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-3667U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Core i7-2640M versus 1600 on the Core i7-3667U — the Core i7-3667U supports 18.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i7-3667U supports up to 32 of RAM compared to 16 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: HM65,HM67,QM67,QS67 (Core i7-2640M) and HM76,UM77,QM77,QS77 (Core i7-3667U).

Feature	Core i7-2640M	Core i7-3667U
Socket	PGA988	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1333	1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity	16	32+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support true virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2640M) and Intel HD Graphics 4000 (Core i7-3667U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i7-2640M rivals Phenom II Black Edition N660; Core i7-3667U rivals AMD A10-4655M.