A12-9700P vs i7-2620M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-2620M
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.55
A12-9700P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.56
+0.6%

A12-9700P outperforms Core i7-2620M by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21272124
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency4.119.66
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date20 February 2011 (13 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$346no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.7 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz3.4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier27no data
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache512 KB2048 KB
L3 cache4 MBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size149 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors624 Million3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketFCBGA1023,PPGA988FP4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX+-
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
DualGraphics-+
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection+-
Anti-Theft+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 3000AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core countno data6
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+
Graphics max frequency1.3 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes168

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i7-2620M 1.55
A12-9700P 1.56
+0.6%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i7-2620M 2422
A12-9700P 2428
+0.2%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

i7-2620M 4333
+78.4%
A12-9700P 2429

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

i7-2620M 9433
+52.9%
A12-9700P 6168

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

i7-2620M 3827
+9.4%
A12-9700P 3498

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

i7-2620M 3
+34.8%
A12-9700P 2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.55 1.56
Recency 20 February 2011 1 June 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

A12-9700P has a 0.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2620M and A12-9700P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i7-2620M
Core i7-2620M
AMD A12-9700P
A12-9700P

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4 177 votes

Rate Core i7-2620M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 121 vote

Rate A12-9700P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-2620M or A12-9700P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.