i7-3520M vs i7-975

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-975
2009
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
2.28
+21.9%

Core i7-975 outperforms Core i7-3520M by a significant 22% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18301999
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.10no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore i7 (Desktop)Intel Core i7
Power efficiency1.604.87
Architecture codenameBloomfield (2008−2010)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date2 June 2009 (15 years ago)3 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$476$346

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads84
Base clock speed3.33 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz3.6 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHz5 GT/s
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die size263 mm2118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)68 °Cno data
Number of transistors731 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M 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 configuration11
SocketFCLGA1366FCBGA1023,FCPGA988
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Intel® AVX
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technology1.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switching--
PAE36 Bitno data
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection-+
Anti-Theftno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-dno data+
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size24 GB32 GB
Max memory channels32
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AIntel HD Graphics 4000
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.25 GHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

i7-975 2.28
+21.9%
i7-3520M 1.87

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.

i7-975 3493
+21.8%
i7-3520M 2868

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.

i7-975 539
i7-3520M 574
+6.5%

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.

i7-975 1884
+61.4%
i7-3520M 1167

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.

i7-975 4101
i7-3520M 4855
+18.4%

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.

i7-975 16628
+58.9%
i7-3520M 10467

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.

i7-975 5837
+41.2%
i7-3520M 4134

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.

i7-975 7.36
+110%
i7-3520M 15.43

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.

i7-975 6
+78.6%
i7-3520M 3

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.28 1.87
Recency 2 June 2009 3 June 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 35 Watt

i7-975 has a 21.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

i7-3520M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 271.4% lower power consumption.

The Core i7-975 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-3520M in performance tests.

Note that Core i7-975 is a desktop processor while Core i7-3520M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-975 and Core i7-3520M, 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 i7-975
Core i7-975
Intel Core i7-3520M
Core i7-3520M

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.


3.6 25 votes

Rate Core i7-975 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 310 votes

Rate Core i7-3520M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-975 or Core i7-3520M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.