Core i7-4810MQ vs Core i5-10210U

Core i7-4810MQ

4 Cores8 Thrd47 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2014

Core i5-10210U

4 Cores8 Thrd25 WWMax: 4.2 GHz2019

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-4810MQ

4 / 8

6,074

0.0%

6,071

0.0%

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 i7-4810MQ is positioned at rank 956 and the Core i5-10210U is on rank 868, so the Core i5-10210U 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 i7-4810MQ

#944

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1826%

#945

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1799%

#946

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1652%

#947

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1644%

#948

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1629%

#950

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1573%

#951

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1508%

#952

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1506%

#953

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1465%

#956

Core i7-4810MQ

MSRP: $378|Avg: $378

100%

#959

Celeron Dual-Core T3500

MSRP: $80|Avg: $15

99%

#960

Celeron 4305UE

MSRP: $107|Avg: $107

99%

#963

Core i7-10510U

MSRP: $409|Avg: N/A

98%

#968

Core i7-4710MQ

MSRP: $378|Avg: $378

95%

#970

Celeron T3100

MSRP: $62|Avg: $62

95%

#971

Core i7-4800MQ

MSRP: $380|Avg: $378

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Core i5-10210U

#856

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1435%

#857

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1414%

#858

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1298%

#859

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1293%

#860

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1281%

#862

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1237%

#863

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1186%

#864

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1184%

#865

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1152%

#868

Core i5-10210U

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#873

Celeron M 540

MSRP: $86|Avg: $20

99%

#877

Microsoft SQ1

MSRP: $300|Avg: $180

98%

#879

Core i5-6440HQ

MSRP: $250|Avg: N/A

98%

#883

Celeron Dual-Core T1600

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

98%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Core i5-10210U (2019) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, DDR4, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Core i7-4810MQ	Core i5-10210U
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($378)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Haswell (2013−2015) / 22 nm)	✨ Modern (Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Core i7-4810MQ (2014) relies on 22 nm technology and DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Core i7-4810MQ	Core i5-10210U
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($378)	✅ 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 i7-4810MQ Benchmark Check

Core i5-10210U Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-4810MQ and Core i5-10210U

Core i7-4810MQ

The Core i7-4810MQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 47 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,074 points. Launch price was $378.

Core i5-10210U

The Core i5-10210U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1528. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 6,071 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-4810MQ and Core i5-10210U share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Core i7-4810MQ versus 4.2 GHz on the Core i5-10210U — a 10% clock advantage for the Core i5-10210U (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Core i7-4810MQ uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i5-10210U uses Comet Lake-U (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4810MQ scores 6,074 against the Core i5-10210U's 6,071 — a 0% lead for the Core i7-4810MQ. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-4810MQ vs 6 MB (total) on the Core i5-10210U.

Feature	Core i7-4810MQ	Core i5-10210U
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	4.2 GHz+11%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+75%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)+33%	6 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Comet Lake-U (2019−2020)
PassMark	6,074	6,071

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4810MQ uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-10210U uses FCBGA1528 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.