A12-9700P vs Core i7-2640M

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i7-2640M
2011
2 cores / 4 threads
1.60
+1.3%

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Core i7-2640M and A12-9700P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19751984
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7AMD Bristol Ridge
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date4 September 2011 (12 years ago)1 June 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$346no data
Current price$114 (0.3x MSRP)$536

Technical specs

Core i7-2640M 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 speed2.8 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz3.4 GHz
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--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-2640M 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 i7-2640M and A12-9700P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8
AES-NI+1
FMA+FMA4
AVX+no data
FRTCno data1
FreeSyncno data1
PowerTuneno data-
DualGraphicsno data1
TrueAudiono data-
PowerNowno data-
PowerGatingno data-
Out-of-band client managementno data-
VirusProtectno data-
RAIDno data-
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+no data
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i7-2640M and A12-9700P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

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

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-2640M and A12-9700P are enumerated here.

AMD-V+1
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data
IOMMU 2.0no data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-2640M and A12-9700P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4-1866
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21.3 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no 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+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+
Graphics max frequency1.3 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-2640M 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 i7-2640M and A12-9700P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2640M 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.

i7-2640M 1.60
+1.3%
A12-9700P 1.58

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i7-2640M 2472
+1.1%
A12-9700P 2446

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 1% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i7-2640M 4443
+82.9%
A12-9700P 2429

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 83% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i7-2640M 9778
+58.5%
A12-9700P 6168

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 59% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i7-2640M 3927
+12.3%
A12-9700P 3498

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 12% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

i7-2640M 3
+38.8%
A12-9700P 2

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 39% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

i7-2640M 1.36
+60%
A12-9700P 0.85

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 60% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-2640M 1.6
A12-9700P 1.8
+12.5%

A12-9700P outperforms Core i7-2640M by 13% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-2640M 2620
+79.2%
A12-9700P 1462

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 79% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-2640M 89
+5.6%
A12-9700P 85

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 6% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-2640M 17
+2%
A12-9700P 17

Core i7-2640M outperforms A12-9700P by 2% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.60 1.58
Integrated graphics card 0.66
Recency 4 September 2011 1 June 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

We couldn't decide between Core i7-2640M and A12-9700P. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2640M and A12-9700P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

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


Intel Core i7-2640M
Core i7-2640M
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.

User Ratings

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


4.2 307 votes

Rate Core i7-2640M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 116 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-2640M or A12-9700P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.