Ryzen 9 7945HX vs Core i7-2820QM
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms i7-2820QM by a whopping 1145% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1603 | 90 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core i7 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Dragon Range-HX (Zen 4) |
| Release date | 3 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 4 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $568 | no data |
| Current price | $567 (1x MSRP) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 5.4 GHz |
| Bus support | 4 × 5 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | CCD = 5 nm, I/O = 6 nm |
| Die size | 216 mm2 | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1160 Million | 13,140 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1224,FCPGA988,PPGA988 | FL1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX | DDR5-5200 RAM, PCIe 5, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| My WiFi | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no 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 |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX 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 i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX 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 i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 3000 | AMD Radeon 610M |
| Quick Sync Video | + | no data |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.3 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| SDVO | + | no data |
| CRT | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 28 |
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.
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 1145% based on our aggregate 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%
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 1148% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 432% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 922% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
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%
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 100% 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%
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 376% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
Core i7-2820QM outperforms Ryzen 9 7945HX by 104% in wPrime 32.
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%
Ryzen 9 7945HX outperforms Core i7-2820QM by 1073% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.84 | 35.37 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.66 | 2.86 |
| Recency | 3 January 2011 | 4 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 16 |
| Threads | 8 | 32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 55 Watt |
The Ryzen 9 7945HX is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-2820QM in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-2820QM and Ryzen 9 7945HX, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
