Core i7-4910MQ vs Xeon D-1622

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 i7-4910MQ vs Xeon D-1622 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 i7-4910MQ vs Xeon D-1622: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-4910MQ

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.0 vs 31.8 PassMark/$ ($570 MSRP vs $195 MSRP).
❌17.5% higher power demand at 47W vs 40W.

Xeon D-1622

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $375 less on MSRP ($195 MSRP vs $570 MSRP).
✅Delivers 188.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 31.8 vs 11.0 PassMark/$ ($195 MSRP vs $570 MSRP).
✅Draws 40W instead of 47W, a 7W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-4910MQ across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,205 vs 6,297).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-4910MQ better than Xeon D-1622?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon D-1622 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-4910MQ is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-4910MQ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 13.0% 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 i7-4910MQ is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Core i7-4910MQ is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Core i7-4910MQ comes in 192.3% more expensive on MSRP at $570 MSRP versus $195 MSRP, and it still gives you a 13.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon D-1622 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 13.0% in the shared gaming data.

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

Xeon D-1622 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2014). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-4910MQ vs Xeon D-1622 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-4910MQ

The Core i7-4910MQ 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 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 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: 6,297 points. Launch price was $568.

Xeon D-1622

The Xeon D-1622 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1667. Thermal design power (TDP): 40 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,205 points. Launch price was $170.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-4910MQ and Xeon D-1622 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the Core i7-4910MQ versus 3.2 GHz on the Xeon D-1622 — a 19.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-4910MQ (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core i7-4910MQ uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon D-1622 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4910MQ scores 6,297 against the Xeon D-1622's 6,205 — a 1.5% lead for the Core i7-4910MQ. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-4910MQ vs 6 MB on the Xeon D-1622.

Feature	Core i7-4910MQ	Xeon D-1622
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.9 GHz+22%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+12%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)+33%	6 MB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	6,297+1%	6,205

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4910MQ uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon D-1622 uses FCBGA1667 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-4910MQ	Xeon D-1622
Socket	PGA946	FCBGA1667
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-4910MQ was priced at $570, while the Xeon D-1622 came in at $195. On launch pricing ($570 vs $195), Xeon D-1622 was $375 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-4910MQ delivers 11.0 pts/$ vs 31.8 pts/$ for the Xeon D-1622 — making the Xeon D-1622 the 96.9% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-4910MQ	Xeon D-1622
MSRP	$570	$195-66%
Performance per Dollar	11.0	31.8+189%
Release Date	2014	2019

Search Core i7-4910MQ on Amazon

Search Xeon D-1622 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.