Quick notes
- In this blog post, we will delve into a fascinating comparison between the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U and **Intel Core i7 3820QM**, two processors from different eras, to see how they stack up against each other.
- On the other hand, the Intel Core i7 3820QM is a veteran from the Sandy Bridge era, known for its power and performance in desktop and mobile workstations.
- While the Intel processor has a higher base clock speed, the Ryzen 7 3700U’s Turbo Boost capabilities allow it to reach higher peak performance in demanding tasks.
The world of CPUs is constantly evolving, with new processors being released every year. This makes it challenging for consumers to choose the right CPU for their needs, especially when comparing processors from different generations. In this blog post, we will delve into a fascinating comparison between the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U and **Intel Core i7 3820QM**, two processors from different eras, to see how they stack up against each other.
The Contenders: AMD Ryzen 7 3700U vs Intel Core i7 3820QM
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700U is a modern, energy-efficient processor designed for thin and light laptops. It’s a part of AMD’s “Zen+” architecture, known for its impressive performance per watt. On the other hand, the Intel Core i7 3820QM is a veteran from the Sandy Bridge era, known for its power and performance in desktop and mobile workstations. Let’s explore their key differences and similarities:
Architecture and Release Date: A Tale of Two Eras
The AMD Ryzen 7 3700U is a modern processor built on the 12nm Zen+ architecture, released in 2018. This architecture is known for its efficiency and performance, offering a significant leap forward from previous AMD generations. The Intel Core i7 3820QM, however, is a veteran from 2011, based on the 32nm Sandy Bridge architecture. While Sandy Bridge was a remarkable architecture in its time, it has aged considerably compared to modern processors.
Core Count and Threading: A Multi-Core Showdown
The Ryzen 7 3700U boasts 4 cores and 8 threads, leveraging AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading (SMT) technology. This allows it to handle multiple tasks efficiently. The Intel Core i7 3820QM, on the other hand, features 4 cores and 8 threads, utilizing Intel’s Hyper-Threading technology. While both processors offer the same core count and thread count, the Ryzen 7 3700U’s newer architecture provides a performance edge.
Clock Speed and Turbo Boost: A Race to the Top
The Ryzen 7 3700U has a base clock speed of 2.3 GHz and can boost up to 4.0 GHz, depending on the workload and thermal conditions. The Intel Core i7 3820QM has a base clock speed of 2.7 GHz and a Turbo Boost frequency of 3.7 GHz. While the Intel processor has a higher base clock speed, the Ryzen 7 3700U’s Turbo Boost capabilities allow it to reach higher peak performance in demanding tasks.
Cache and Memory: A Battle of Bandwidth
The Ryzen 7 3700U features 4 MB of L3 cache, which helps store frequently used data for faster access. The Intel Core i7 3820QM has a larger L3 cache of 8 MB. However, the Ryzen 7 3700U supports up to 2400 MHz DDR4 memory, while the Intel Core i7 3820QM is limited to 1600 MHz DDR3 memory. This gives the Ryzen 7 3700U a significant advantage in terms of memory bandwidth.
Integrated Graphics: A Visual Showdown
The Ryzen 7 3700U integrates AMD Radeon Vega 10 graphics, offering decent performance for casual gaming and multimedia tasks. The Intel Core i7 3820QM features Intel HD Graphics 3000, which is significantly less powerful than the Vega 10. This makes the Ryzen 7 3700U a more suitable choice for users who require integrated graphics for everyday tasks.
Power Consumption and Thermal Design Power (TDP): A Balancing Act
The Ryzen 7 3700U is designed for energy efficiency with a TDP of 15W. This low power consumption makes it ideal for laptops that prioritize battery life. The Intel Core i7 3820QM, on the other hand, has a TDP of 45W, indicating a higher power consumption. This makes it less suitable for thin and light laptops, but it can deliver more raw performance in desktop systems.
Performance: A Head-to-Head Comparison
In terms of performance, the Ryzen 7 3700U significantly outperforms the Intel Core i7 3820QM. This is primarily due to the newer Zen+ architecture, which offers better efficiency and performance per watt. Benchmarks show that the Ryzen 7 3700U delivers faster multi-core performance, which is crucial for modern applications and multitasking. However, the Intel Core i7 3820QM still holds its own in single-core performance, which can be beneficial for some older applications.
Summary: The Verdict
Choosing between the AMD Ryzen 7 3700U and Intel Core i7 3820QM depends on your specific needs and priorities. If you prioritize energy efficiency, battery life, and modern performance, the Ryzen 7 3700U is the clear winner. It’s a powerful and efficient processor designed for thin and light laptops, offering excellent performance for everyday tasks, casual gaming, and multimedia creation. However, if you require raw performance for demanding applications and are not concerned about power consumption, the **Intel Core i7 3820QM might still be a viable option.** It’s a powerful processor that can handle demanding tasks, but it’s outdated and less efficient compared to the Ryzen 7 3700U.
Popular Questions
Q: Which processor is better for gaming?
A: The Ryzen 7 3700U offers better integrated graphics and overall performance, making it a better choice for casual gaming.
Q: Which processor is more suitable for multitasking?
A: The Ryzen 7 3700U’s multi-core performance and SMT technology make it more suitable for multitasking.
Q: Which processor is more energy-efficient?
A: The Ryzen 7 3700U is significantly more energy-efficient with a lower TDP, making it ideal for laptops that prioritize battery life.
Q: Which processor is more affordable?
A: The Intel Core i7 3820QM is generally more affordable, as it’s an older processor. However, the Ryzen 7 3700U offers better value for money considering its performance and efficiency.
Q: Which processor is better for video editing?
A: The Ryzen 7 3700U’s multi-core performance and support for faster memory make it a better choice for video editing.
