CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4700HQ vs 5750M

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

3DMark06 (CPU), Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

TDP

Features

How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Features and specifications that differ between products

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i7 4700HQ

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i7 4700HQ

Report a correction
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better turbo clock speed 1,200 MHz vs 720 MHz More than 65% better turbo clock speed
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Much better 3DMark11 physics score 6,810 vs 2,510 Around 2.8x better 3DMark11 physics score
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 6,758.5 vs 3,238 More than 2x better 3DMark06 CPU score
Significantly better PassMark score 7,939 vs 3,814 More than 2x better PassMark score
Significantly better geekbench (64-bit) score 11,793 vs 5,062 More than 2.2x better geekbench (64-bit) score
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,833 vs 1,230 Around 50% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better performance per watt 21.27 pt/W vs 12.53 pt/W Around 70% better performance per watt
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.49 GHz vs 3.12 GHz More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Front view of AMD A10 5750M

Reasons to consider the
AMD A10 5750M

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 1 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 38.19W More than 25% lower typical power consumption
Higher GPU clock speed 533 MHz vs 400 MHz Around 35% higher GPU clock speed
Higher Maximum Operating Temperature 105 °C vs 100 °C 5% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 11.32 $/year More than 25% lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i7 4700HQ vs A10 5750M

GeekBench (32-bit)

A10 5750M
3,901

GeekBench (64-bit)

A10 5750M
5,062

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Core i7 4700HQ A10 5750M @ community.futuremark.com

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

Core i7 4700HQ
6,758.5
A10 5750M
3,238

Passmark

Core i7 4700HQ A10 5750M @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i7 4700HQ  vs
A10 5750M 
Clock speed 2.4 GHz 2.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.5 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Is unlocked No No
Is hyperthreaded Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AVX 2.0
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4600 Radeon™ HD 8650G
GPU clock speed 400 MHz 533 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,200 MHz 720 MHz

details

Core i7 4700HQ  vs
A10 5750M 
Threads 8 4
L2 cache 1 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 105°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.49 GHz 3.12 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.4 GHz 2.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.49 GHz 3.12 GHz

power consumption

TDP 47W 35W
Annual home energy cost 11.32 $/year 8.43 $/year
Performance per watt 21.27 pt/W 12.53 pt/W
Typical power consumption 38.19W 28.44W
Intel Core i7 4700HQ
Report a correction
AMD A10 5750M
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus