Why are i7 quad cores more common than i5 quad cores on laptops?

On desktops there's a pretty even split between the 7600K and the 7700K, and with Ultrabooks i5's far outnumber i7's. Yet among quad core laptop CPUs the 7700HQ is ubiquitous and i5's are quite rare in comparison, appearing only in lower-midrange gaming laptops.

 

Intel marketing cannot clearly segment their product lines. Honestly its a real mess.

 

That's a funny question to ask if I'm understanding it right.

The i7's are significantly better than the i5's; that's why.

Especially in mobile form/platforms.

See:
https://ark.intel.com/compare/97456,97185

See:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2906&cmp[]=2922


With identical TDP's, a ~32% performance advantage in multicore workloads and a ~8.5% advantage in 'snappiness' (i.e. single core performance), the i5 is a poor substitute for a retail difference of usually less than $100 (or < 10%) savings.

Does your workload benefit from an i5 vs. an i7? Or does that small price difference for a big usability increase in varied workloads take it out of your price/budget range?

 

See... Mobile processors aka BGA are soldered/welded on the MB. Can't be replaced. And mobile processors ain't very powerful. Better with somewhat more performance aka quad core i7 than the even weaker performing i5. You have more upgrade options with desktops. You ain't screwed with lowest possible performance. You can upgrade from i5 and up to an unlocked i7 with desktops.

 

By that logic, the 7820HK is an even better deal. For another $100, you gain the ability to overclock for an additional 20-25% improvement in performance, making it significantly better than the 7700HQ. Yet the 7700HQ is more common than the 7820HK.

 

@OP. You're not the only one to wonder this. I've often wondered why we don't see a lot more i5's paired with 1060 GPU's. The thermals would be great for a slim laptop.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

See:
https://ark.intel.com/compare/97464,97456,97185

See:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2938&cmp[]=2906

Of course it is. But it is not $100 more (they are the same price as the i7-7700HQ from Intel...).

The single thread 'score' is only ~4% better for the HK - but the multi thread 'score' is ~13% better. With the same cost and same TDP; the HK is superior in every way.

What makes the HQ more 'common' though? I'm sure manufacturers get a better price per 1000's on them (and that's all...).

 

HKs are frequently put in systems with other more expensive components, so the price difference can be a lot more.

 

The $100 figure is what Alienware charges for upgrading from the 7700HQ to the 7820HK. As Tanner@XoticPC says, there are not that many gaming laptops where you can CTO without moving to a completely different SKU with other more expensive components.

And of course Intel charges OEMs more for the 7820HK compared to the 7700HQ. But Intel also charges more for the 7700HQ compared to an i5 so if an OEM's main goal is to get as low a BOM as possible, they'd go for the i5 and we'd see a lot more of those out there. So there must be something other factor causing OEMs to choose i7 over i5...

Finally, I doubt anyone splurging for the 7820HK would be running it at stock - that would be a colossal waste of money.

 

Read Intel's Recommended Customer Prices Maybe the OEMs get a better deal on 7700hq due more sales of this model (used in both thin and very thin lapbooks).

Would you bet money on this?

 

I recall one that was available with the 7700HQ and 7820HK, but I'm almost certain they were just trying out the idea of having interchangeable boards for the same SKU and they ran out of HKs almost immediately.