Is the Intel Core i7-2630QM better than Intel Core i7 940XM?

Is the Intel Core i7-2630QM on r3's better than the Intel Core i7 940XM in r2's? If not atleast perform almost the same?



I read it here PassMark Intel vs AMD CPU Benchmarks - High End

 

Stock for Stock...YES...when OVERCLOCKED using Throttlestop 920xm and 940xm can turn into BEASTS and trump over other processors. No point buying a processor that can overclock and use it as stock.

 

Oh. I get it. Thanks.

 

This has been asked before, the search bar or even just scrolling through the first 5-10 pages are your friend As Faiz mentioned stock for stock the SB cpu's stomp all the first gen i7 mobile cpu's, now when the 2920xm gets released I think we'll have a new overall king, until then 920/940xm+throttlestop=king.

 

This thread reminds me about my cancelled R3 with SB chipset
I'll just wait for the next 3920XM/21020XM or Ivy Bridge to fullfill this loss

 

I am kinda surprised at the test, all 3 CPUs appear with the same score. I would think that the Sandy Bridges would get a little higher. I know its rated the like the 920xm at 2.0ghz but the architecture improvement should have kicked in.

I really think I will skip a upgrade this around and keep my G73jh with me and upgrade to a 920xm ES cpu, I will just overclock that.

 

It is hardly surprising -- I don't know what that test is measuring, but it's not CPU performance. Forget Sandy Bridge for a second and look at the comparison of the 920XM and 940XM. These are exactly the same processor except that the 940XM runs at 133MHz higher (2.13GHz rather than 2.0GHz). Therefore, you would expect to see a performance increase of 6.7% which means if the 920XM scores 4419, the 940XM should score around 4710, but in fact not only does it score significantly lower than that, it actually somehow scores less than the 920XM.

When you see that kind of result, it means that either the benchmark is seriously messed up or, much more likely, the test was not done in a professional way. For example, maybe the 940XM was in a laptop with a much worse cooling system or maybe it had a bloated Windows install that was taking up resources while the test was running or the 920XM was overclocked or any one of a number of other things. The same almost certainly applies to Sandy Bridge: compare the 2630QM to the 2720QM. The latter is better (particularly when Turbo Boosting), but for it to get 7076 when the 2630QM only gets 4398 it would have to be 61% better and there is simply no way that's true (look at the clock speeds!).

I would advise against taking such "auto-benchmarks" too seriously -- look at the reviews already out and extrapolate or wait for more reviews to come out (you can't buy a Sandy Bridge until the chipset fiasco is resolved anyways).

 

Maybe just look at benchmarks of real software that you want to use?

 

OK, now you're just being silly. In fact, we should all just take a look at the Windows Experience Score.

 

It's undoubtedly better stock (new architecture & higher turbo) and it should run much cooler. And it's dirt cheap too. To be fair the 940xm should be compared to the 2720qm at least, would need a serious OC to reach the same level of performance, and require the corresponding cooling system.

 

Windows Experience INDEX (WEI). And we all know a bigger WEI is always better don't we?