Core i7-2840QM vs PRO A12-8870

Core i7-2840QM vs PRO A12-8870 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-2840QM

4 / 8

3,842

+1.0%

3,805

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Core i7-2840QM vs PRO A12-8870 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 i7-2840QM vs PRO A12-8870: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-2840QM

2011

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

PRO A12-8870

2016

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,805 vs 3,842).
❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-2840QM better than PRO A12-8870?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, PRO A12-8870 is ahead with a 0.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2840QM pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2840QM is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-2840QM still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-2840QM comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark. That said, if you already own a compatible AM4 + DDR4 setup, PRO A12-8870 can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

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

PRO A12-8870 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-2840QM vs PRO A12-8870 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-2840QM

The Core i7-2840QM 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. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 3,842 points. Launch price was $69.

PRO A12-8870

The PRO A12-8870 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Outubro 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. 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: 3,805 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-2840QM packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the PRO A12-8870's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Core i7-2840QM versus 4.2 GHz on the PRO A12-8870 — a 54.5% clock advantage for the PRO A12-8870. The Core i7-2840QM uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the PRO A12-8870 uses Carrizo (2015−2018) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2840QM scores 3,842 against the PRO A12-8870's 3,805 — a 1% lead for the Core i7-2840QM.

Feature	Core i7-2840QM	PRO A12-8870
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 4
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz	4.2 GHz+75%
Base Clock	—	3.7 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB	2048 kB+100%
Process	32 nm	28 nm-13%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
PassMark	3,842	3,805