0 Comments
| Intel Core i7 2635QM vs Apple A8 |
Released January, 2011
Intel Core i7 2635QM
- 2 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core i7 2635QM
![]() | More advanced architecture x86-64 | ![]() | Higher clock speed 2 GHz |
![]() | Much better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 8,274 | ![]() | More threads 8 |
VS
Released September, 2014
Apple A8
- 1.4 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Apple A8
![]() | Much better performance per watt 250.67 pt/W | ![]() | Significantly newer manufacturing process 20 nm |
![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 2.03W | ![]() | Newer Sep, 2014 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
More advanced architecture | x86-64 | vs | ARM | A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Higher clock speed | 2 GHz | vs | 1.4 GHz | Around 45% higher clock speed | |||
Much better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 8,274 | vs | 2,910 | More than 2.8x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
More threads | 8 | vs | 2 | 6 more threads | |||
Slightly more l3 cache | 6 MB | vs | 4 MB | 50% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
Better geekbench 3 single core score | 2,275 | vs | 1,623 | More than 40% better geekbench 3 single core score | |||
More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| |||||||
Much better performance per watt | 250.67 pt/W | vs | 15.88 pt/W | More than 15.8x better performance per watt | |||
Significantly newer manufacturing process | 20 nm | vs | 32 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 2.03W | vs | 36.56W | 18x lower typical power consumption | |||
Newer | Sep, 2014 | vs | Jan, 2011 | Release date over 3 years later | |||
More l2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core | |||
More l3 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 1.5 MB/core | Around 35% more l3 cache per core | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 0.6 $/year | vs | 10.84 $/year | 18x lower annual home energy cost | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 2.19 $/year | vs | 39.42 $/year | 18x lower annual commercial energy cost |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 2635QM vs Apple A8
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core i7 2635QM
8,274
Apple A8
2,910
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core i7 2635QM
2,275
Apple A8
1,623
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core i7 2635QM
1,890,000 MB/s
Apple A8
993,000 MB/s
GeekBench
Core i7 2635QM
10,685
Apple A8
1,678
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core i7 2635QM | vs | Apple A8 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2 GHz | 1.4 GHz | |
Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
Is unlocked | No | No | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 2 GHz | 2 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2 GHz | 2 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2 GHz | 2 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 45W | 2.5W | |
Annual home energy cost | 10.84 $/year | 0.6 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 39.42 $/year | 2.19 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 15.88 pt/W | 250.67 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 36.56W | 2.03W |
details | Core i7 2635QM | vs | Apple A8 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | ARM | |
Threads | 8 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
L3 cache | 6 MB | 4 MB | |
L3 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 32 nm | 20 nm | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | GPU | GPU | |
Label | Intel® HD Graphics 3000 | PowerVR Series 6XT GX6450 | |
memory controller | |||
Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
Memory type | |||
DDR3-1333 | |||
DDR3-1066 | |||
DDR3 | |||
LPDDR3-1333 | |||
Maximum memory size | 16,384 MB | 1,024 MB |
Intel Core i7 2635QM ![]() | Apple A8 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
A8 vs A7 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
A8 vs A8X | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
A8 vs 600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
A8 vs (APL0498) | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
A8 vs 800 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
A8 vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$378 | ||
2635QM vs A7 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$134 | $225 | |
847 vs 3217U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
3470 vs 5200 | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 3 comments.
Emerald_Shine5850 (07:58 AM, September 13, 2015)
Jay N Turner (06:31 PM, September 12, 2015)
Tina Brandy (01:41 AM, September 10, 2015)