Intel i7 9750h benchmark

Intel i7 9750h benchmark DEFAULT

Intel Core i7-9750H Minecraft Benchmarks - Can Core i7-9750H Run Minecraft?

Core i7-9750H - 1080p - R9 390 - Minecraft Benchmarks

Core i7-9750H - 1080p - R9 390 - Can Core i7-9750H run Minecraft?

The Core i7-9750H sits between Core i7-9850H and Core i7-8850H. It is 0% lower than the Core i7-9850H while being 0.5% higher than the Core i7-8850H. In this benchmark, the Core i7-9750H has an impressive performance, which is way ahead of the last generation Core i7-8750H by 1.3%. Again, the Core i7-8750H tumbles down the chart, falling behind its Coffee Lake Refresh-based successor. That's a ~1.3% generational speed-up in this title. The Core i7-8750H clearly shows how significantly the high-end Coffee Lake H-based CPUs fall behind the Coffee Lake Refresh models. The Core i7-9750H's performance earns it the 4th place. Overall, the Core i7-9750H is a very good performer with its 6-cores and 12-threads in this benchmark.


Intel Core i7-9750H benchmarks and review, vs i7-8750H and i7-7700HQ

If you’re looking for a modern gaming or high-performance laptop in the second part of 2019 and first half of 2020, that’s most likely running on an Intel 9th gen Coffee Lake-Refresh hardware platform with the Intel Core i7-9750H processor.

This replaces last year’s mainstream option, the 8th gen Core i7-8750H CPU, but it is only an incremental refinement, as still a 45W TDP 6-core/12-thread mobile processor based on Intel’s revised 14++ nm lithography.

So what does this actually mean? Down below we’ll talk about the i7-9750H’s main architectural traits and features, how it fares against the i7-8750H and the previous generation i7-7700HQ, as well as what you should expect in terms of benchmarks results and real-life performance in games and other demanding CPU loads.

That being said, the Core i7-9750H is a six-core processor with HyperThreading and TurboBoost, part of the Intel Coffee Lake-Refresh H family of high-performance mobile processors. Its 6 Cores get a Base Clock speed of 2.6 GHz, a .4 GHz bump from the previous generation,  and can Turbo up to between 4.5 GHz (Max Single Core Turbo) and 4.0 GHz (Max 6-Core Turbo). The i7-9750H also gets 12 MB of L3 cache, a 33% increase, as well as integrates a similar Intel UHD 630 iGPU clocked at 1.15 GHz. Check out the table below for more details.

i7-9750H (Ark)
i7-8750H (Ark)
i7-7700HQ (Ark)
Litography14++ nm14++ nm14+ nm
CPU Base Frequency2.6 GHz2.2 GHz2.8 GHz
Turbo – All Cores4.0 GHz3.9 GHz3.4 GHz
Turbo – 1 Core4.5 GHz4.1 GHz3.8 GHz
L3 Cache12 MB9 MB6 MB
DDR4 – 2666 MhzDDR4 – 2666 MhzDDR4 – 2400 Mhz
GraphicsIntel UHD 630Intel UHD 630Intel HD 630

There aren’t any other significant architectural differences between the Coffee Lake and the Coffee Lake-R i7s, but there are a few other interesting side-aspects of this 9th gen Core platform worth mentioning, like the official support for 32 GB RAM modules, allowing up to 128 GB of RAM on high-tier devices with 4 memory DIMMs, as well as integration with Intel’s new AX200 Wi-Fi 6 wireless card, which will probably make its way into many of the higher-tier designs. Thunderbolt 3 is still not baked into the SOC and requires additional controllers, just like before.

Much like in the past, the i7-9750H sits at the middle of the Coffee Lake-R stack, with Core i5s (4C/8T) at the bottom, and two Core i9 models, with 8 Cores, 16 Threads and overclocking ability on the high-end i9-9980HK, which we’ll further discuss in a separate article.

As far as the performance goes, you’re probably aware by now that each notebook is different and the hardware’s performance is highly dependant on both the thermal and power designs. Since the 9750H is pretty much a higher-clocked version of the 8750H, it’s not going to perform significantly better in most units, but it will run at slightly higher clocks in those whose thermals will be able to accommodate its higher clocks. However, don’t forget there’s only a .1 GHz bump in all-core Turbo between the two generations, as the i7-8750H can run at a maximum of 3.9 GHz in 100% all-core loads, while the i7-9750H is designed to run at up to 4.0 GHz in similar conditions.

That’s why the 9750H will show its strength in applications that can benefit from its 33% extra L3 cache memory, but for the most part, the vast majority of users won’t be able to tell the difference between the two in real-life use.

In fact, the difference is small even in benchmarks, based on our first encounters with the i7-9750H. Down below we’ve gathered some benchmark results of the 9th gen i7 in the Asus ROG Zephyrus S  GX502GW, one of the better thermal/power designs in the ultraportable niche, so pretty much one of the best performing implementations of this CPU. We’ve put them side by side to results of the Asus ROG GX701GX and Lenovo Legion Y740 for comparison, two of the better 8750H implementations on the market (once tweaked), as well as an average of different 8750H builds, based on Notebookcheck’s larger pool of data. We also threw in the i7-7700HQ’s average next to those, for those of you looking to upgrade from an older laptop to one of these newer generation devices.

i7-9750H on GX502i7-8750H on GX701i7-8750H on Y740i7-8750H averagei7-7700HQ average
3DMark 11 – Physics131031215512459~11500~8800
3DMark – Fire Strike Physics168391644516674~15500~10600
Cinebench R20 CPU2943~2580
Cinebench R15 CPU127511811243~1110 cb~730 cb
Cinebench R15 CPU – Single Core177169168~173 cb~159 cb
Geekbench 4.1 64-bit – Single Core519850435061~4870 pts~4630 pts
Geekbench 4.1 64-bit – Multi Core238202260522578~19875 pts~14800 pts
PassMark CPU149781436614074~14450~8900
PCMark 10 – Productivity813175257116~7200~7000
PCMark 10 – Digital Content Creation737971366794~5400~5400
x264 HD Benchmark 4.0 – Pass 1216.45207.67206.23~200.3 fps~168.4 fps
x264 HD Benchmark 4.0 – Pass 278.1869.8777.34~67.2 fps~46 fps

Don’t forget these are best-case results on a properly cooled implementation with a 65+ W TDP limit and a slight -50 mV undervolt, one that is able to maintain a stable 4.0 GHz Turbo Clock speed in our Cinebench R15 loop test, as shown in the picture below. Most other i7-9750H SKUs will be limited at only 45 Ws and won’t benefit from a similar thermal design, thus won’t be able to hit this kind of scores, and will fare closer to the average i7-8750H model. We’ll update the results above with an average of several 9750H builds, once we get to reviews enough units.

Knowing all these, we can draw a few simple conclusions. First of all, if you’re in the market for a gaming laptop, a Core i7-9750H configuration is not a must. In fact, if you can find the same model with an i7-8750H CPU with a discount, that would be the smarter choice, and on top of that, keep in mind that you don’t really need a 6C/12T processor for gaming anyway, so perhaps one of the exiting 8/9th gen Core i5s might better fit within your budget and perhaps allow you to squeeze in a better GPU, which actually makes a difference with games.

On the other hand, if you’re in the market for primarily a performance laptop with a powerful processor and lots of RAM, you should look at the existing 9750H models, not necessarily for the increased CPU performance, but mostly because of the increased amount of L3 cache and support for the 32 GB RAM slots, if that is within your plans (and budget, because those 32 GB DIMMs are very expensive).

Of course, it comes without saying that upgrading from an i7-8750H configuration to one of the newer i7-9750H models won’t make much sense, unless there are other features that you’re after, like a better design, screen or GPU. If you’re coming from an older laptop, though, perhaps something built on a 6700HQ and 7700HQ, any of the 6-Core i7s are a significant bump in performance, and you might actually want to look at one of the newer 9750H models not for the extra CPU performance, which is negligible, but because there’s a good chance these newer devices offer traits and features that the older 2018 variants might lack.

Bottom point, the 9th gen i7-9750H is just an incremental upgrade of last year’s i7-8750H, and won’t offer a significant performance boost in everyday use, games or even in most demanding loads, with the exceptions of those that can benefit from its increased amount of L3 cache. That’s why, if you’re looking for a faster laptop platform, you should either check out the 9th gen 8C/16T Core i9 builds, the few 9th gen i9-9900K desktop-replacement implementations, or perhaps some of the Ryzen SKUs that might be available in the near future.

Disclaimer: Our content is reader-supported. If you buy through some of the links on our site, we may earn a commission. Learn more.

Andrei Girbea, Editor-in-Chief of I've been covering mobile computers since the 2000s and you'll mostly find reviews and thorough guides written by me here on the site.

  1. Westinghouse 24 inch smart tv
  2. Sacramento city hazardous waste disposal
  3. The wedding shoe game printable
  4. 2011 camry tire pressure reset
CPU-Z Benchmark for Intel Core i7-9750H (1T) - CPU-Z VALIDATOR

11th Gen Intel Core i9-11900K


11th Gen Intel Core i7-11700K


11th Gen Intel Core i5-11600K


AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core


11th Gen Intel Core i7-11700


11th Gen Intel Core i5-11600KF


Intel Core i9-10900KF


11th Gen Intel Core i7-11800H


11th Gen Intel Core i5-11400


11th Gen Intel Core i5-11400F


Intel Core i7-10700KF


Intel Core i5-10600KF


11th Gen Intel Core i7-1165G7


AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT 6-Core


11th Gen Intel Core i5-1135G7


AMD Ryzen 3 3300X 4-Core


AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G


AMD Ryzen 5 3600X 6-Core


AMD Ryzen 5 3600 6-Core


AMD Ryzen 5 3500X 6-Core


AMD Ryzen 5 3500 6-Core


(YOU) Intel Core i7-9750H


AMD Ryzen 3 3100 4-Core


AMD Ryzen 5 3550H with


Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3


AMD Ryzen 7 3750H with


AMD Ryzen 5 3500U with


Intel Xeon E5-2678 v3


Intel Xeon E3-1230 V2


AMD Ryzen 5 2500U with


Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3


AMD Ryzen 3 3200U with


Intel Core 2 Duo E8400


Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550


Intel Core 2 Duo E7500


Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400


Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400


Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600


CPUID ©2001-2020 - All website content subjected to copyright Samuel D. & Franck D.

Intel i7-9750H vs Ryzen 7 3750H - Laptop CPU Comparison and Benchmarks

Intel Core i7-10750H vs i7-9750H Review

Today we’re taking a look at what's likely going to be the most popular of Intel’s 10th generation H-series processors, the Core i7-10750H. This six-core processor is the successor to the very popular Core i7-8750H and Core i7-9750H, which are almost the universal choice for gaming laptops in the $1,000 to $1,800 range, and often take a lead role in productivity-focused 15-inch ultraportables as well.

This isn’t the only Core i7 processor in Intel’s Comet Lake line-up. There are a few other options including the new 8-core Core i7-10875H that we reviewed a few weeks ago, but judging by previous generations, anything above the 10750H will typically be restricted to premium options, while the Core i5s you see here – which amazingly are still quad cores – are destined for the most basic entry-level designs.

Going into this review though, there was one key question that I kept asking myself: is the Core i7-10750H actually any better than the 9750H or the 8750H that came before it? After all, they're all based on a similar Skylake-derivative architecture, built using the same 14nm technology, and all pack 6 cores within a default 45W power envelope. Without any major enhancements to the underlying technology, can the third iteration of this processor actually offer anything new?

No doubt, that’s what we’ll be finding out today with a comprehensive comparison of the 10750H to the 9750H and 8750H, along with a look at how it stacks up to AMD’s newly minted competitor in this price range, the eight-core Ryzen 7 4800H. This review will be focused on productivity performance and then we’ll tackle gaming in a separate article that we're preparing because there are a few interesting things going on with this latest generation of GPUs as well.

Let’s briefly return to the spec chart to have a look at the Core i7-10750H and what we are getting. The basic specs are six cores and twelve threads, a 45W default TDP and 12 MB of L3 cache, same as the last two generations.

What has increased is memory support, now up to DDR4-2933, as well as clock speeds. The base remains at 2.6 GHz, however boost clocks have increased to 5.0 GHz for single-core Turbo with Thermal Velocity Boost, meaning we’ll hit that frequency when the processor is running at below 65C. At higher temperatures, which most laptops run at, that frequency will drop by 200 MHz to sit at a 4.8 GHz Turbo. That’s still a 7% increase on the 4.5 GHz Turbo the Core i7-9750H provided.

All-core turbos have also increased, now at 4.3 GHz, up from 4.0 GHz, however we believe this is influenced to some degree by Thermal Velocity Boost. In practice, we saw all-core turbos around the 4.1 to 4.2 GHz mark on most occasions, and sustained frequencies are naturally much lower than this, don’t expect your 10750H CPU to just sit at 4.3 GHz on all cores all the time.

Test Setup: MSI GS66 Stealth

The test system for today’s review is the MSI GS66 Stealth. This awesome laptop came packing the i7-10750H along with an RTX 2060 discrete GPU configured at 80W. There’s also 16GB of dual-channel DDR4-2666 by default (which we swapped to DDR4-2933 to make the most of the CPU), a 512GB SSD, and a 1080p 240Hz display which is pretty nice.

We're huge fans of the MSI GS Stealth range. We think they look great and this is no exception. We won't review this laptop in full today, but we can tell you it's got a very nice chassis, great display, huge 99.9 Wh battery, and generally decent keyboard. This remains one of my favorite ultraportables from a design and functionality standpoint.

In terms of performance and power limits we’re not getting top hardware capabilities given the slim and light design. The CPU can easily run at the default 45W limit, but tops out around 53W maximum with the Turbo modes. We’ve seen some thicker designs do up to 70W or more. The GPU is fine sitting at 80W though, no concerns there.

The CPU only topping out at 53W in the CoolerBoost mode is basically irrelevant though for this testing, as we run all CPUs using stock settings, so in this case for the Core i7-10750H that’s a 45W long term PL1 power limit. The MSI GS66 was configured to use a huge 135W short term PL2 out of the box, however in practice we didn’t see the CPU go over 70W very often. Still, this is a bit higher than the 56-60W we normally saw with 9750H systems.

The reason why we use stock settings and similar power limits is so we can compare processor performance at a given power level. Unlike with desktops, power consumption is crucial in laptops: more power hungry parts require larger coolers and therefore larger laptops. Comparing chips on an equivalent power level allows us to see how they would perform in an equivalent type of design. The more a CPU can do within a certain power limit, the more efficient it is, and the more you can do with a smaller, lighter design.

This is naturally one of the many challenges with laptop testing, it’s quite hard to get apples-to-apples comparisons given the differences in configurations, so we try our best to put everything on an even playing field. The following performance charts contain averages from equivalent hardware configurations to provide a generalized look at performance from a given CPU. You can see here the full list of laptops we tested.

One last quick note about undervolting before we head to benchmark results. As we discussed in our Core i7-10875H review, more OEMs are locking down undervolting this generation, likely to prevent Plundervolt exploits. This was the case on the MSI GS66 Stealth. You may re-enable undervolting through the advanced options in MSI’s BIOS though.


Let’s start with a look at Cinebench R20, a favorite for testing multi-threading although Intel likes to think it's pretty irrelevant. The Core i7-10750H isn’t providing much of an improvement over the Core i7-9750H when we are looking at default 45W power limits. In the multi-thread test the new 10th-gen part is less than 2 percent faster -- margin of error type of result -- while in single-thread we’re seeing a minor 3 percent performance increase.

It’s not much better against the 8750H either: 4% faster in the multi-thread test, and 12% faster in the single-thread test thanks to a clock speed increase from a maximum of 4.1 GHz to 4.8-ish GHz. In both tests it’s easily beaten by the higher tier Core i7-10875H with eight cores, but it’s crushed as well by the Ryzen 7 4800H, which sits in a similar tier. Ryzen is not only over 60 percent faster in multi-thread, it also holds a 7% lead in single-core.

Not a lot is different in Cinebench R15, on this occasion the 10750H is actually slower on average in the multi-thread test compared to the 9750H, but it still holds a lead in single-thread. All of these margins are single-digit type stuff, so marginal change among them.

In a longer-term workload like Handbrake, we don’t see much of an improvement comparing the 10750H to the 9750H. Ryzen holds an absolute lead over Intel’s most popular Core i7, finishing this x265 transcode over 50% faster.

Blender delivers almost identical results to Handbrake when testing Intel’s current and last generation six-core processors. You just aren’t gaining anything substantial from this move. We mean, this isn’t a surprise as it’s basically the same silicon.

Code compilation was one of the best results we’ve seen for the 10750H. In this GCC compilation, which is a mixture of single and multi-threaded sections, the 10750H ended up 10 percent ahead of the 9750H a combination of higher boost and clock speeds in some situations. However it still easily loses to the Ryzen 7 4800H, which is faster for both multi and lightly threaded workloads in most cases.

Microsoft Excel was a workload where the 10750H ended up a little bit behind the 9750H on average out of the laptops that we’ve tested. A few variances in boost behaviour will be causing this. As Excel is mostly multi-threaded, performance falls behind both the 10875H and 4800H by double digit margins.

In PCMark 10’s lighter workloads, the slight single-thread performance improvement does help out in some situations. We’re looking at equivalent performance in the productivity test to the 9750H, although it remains around 10 percent behind both the 10875H and 4800H here. In the Essentials test, that clock speed bump helps deliver 3% better performance, but again, it falls behind Intel’s faster 8-core model and the new Ryzen 7 from AMD.

7-Zip shows performance to be very similar between the 10750H, 9750H and 8750H, not much in it here. As this test is multi-threaded, performance is a tad behind Intel’s 8-core 10875H, up to 25% slower, and it’s also behind Ryzen 7 4800H.

MATLAB shows no real performance gain for the 10750H over the 9750H, and similar to other tests we’ve just been looking at, it’s slower than 8 core CPU options by a double digit margin. Given the Ryzen 7 results, six-cores at this price point is looking a bit dated.

One of the more significant victories for the 10750H is in Acrobat PDF exporting, which is a fully single threaded workload. With clock speeds 7% higher with the 10750H over the 9750H, and both CPUs being able to run at these clocks within the power limit on a single core, the 10750H was 7% faster in this test. This allows it to claim one of the only performance leads over the Ryzen 7 4800H that I saw.

In AES performance, again we’re not seeing much difference between the 9750H and 10750H, or even to the 10875H. That’s because this is a hardware accelerated function and it doesn’t seem like there’s been any gains here at all, probably as the architecture is the same. Cryptography is another area where Ryzen is much faster in laptops, 35% faster when multi-threaded.

Photoshop is one of the rare workloads where the needle shifted marginally in favor of the new 10th-gen CPU, in Puget’s benchmark we’re seeing 9% higher performance with the same RTX 2060 GPU. This allowed it to match the Ryzen 7 4800H configuration with a lower tier GTX 1660 Ti, which on face value is reasonable until you realize it's outperformed by a cheaper Ryzen configuration.

DaVinci Resolve Studio using the Puget workload is another rare instance where our Core i7-10750H configuration was slower than our Core i7-9750H system with the same RTX 2060 GPU. It wasn’t massively slower, but it was slower overall which is an odd result. Nevertheless, both CPU options fell behind the Ryzen 7 4800H which is typical of video encoding applications.

And finally we get to our set of Premiere workloads. For exporting, there’s no real difference between the 10750H and 9750H when paired with the same GPU, you’re looking at margin of error type stuff using the latest Premiere beta version which adds hardware acceleration for Nvidia GPUs. Like with DaVinci Resolve, the Ryzen 7 4800H is a better choice here as it can chew through the CPU limited parts of the encode faster.

Live Playback performance is also quite similar between most of these options, the Ryzen 7 4800H is marginally ahead but not by much. If you’re like us and stick to purely software encoding for maximum quality, again there’s just not much to be gained between the 10750H and 9750H, we saw a 6% improvement here which is actually on the higher side, but with 25% lower performance than a Ryzen 7 4800H configuration it just doesn’t end up being that impressive overall.

And finally we have the Warp Stabilizer effect, which is lightly threaded. No performance gains over the Core i7-9750H, and like we’ve been talking about in seemingly every single benchmark throughout this video, it just can’t keep up with the Ryzen 7 4800H in this test. When running a single warp stabilizer instance, the 4800H was 22% faster.

What We Learned

The main reason why we aren’t getting better performance with this generation is the simple fact that Intel has not changed the architecture or manufacturing tech for years. When there are no IPC gains to be had, and minimal improvements to efficiency, you’re stuck with virtually zero performance gains in a power limited form factor like a laptop. And this is most obvious when viewing clock speeds.

In Cinebench R20, the 10750H performs almost exactly like a Core i7-9750H, which itself performs like a Core i7-8750H. Those two last generation processors clocked around 3.1 GHz long term across six cores within the 45W power limit. The 10750H ends up clocking around 3.2 GHz long term, so a 100 MHz increase in this instance. With that equating to a 3% clock speed gain, it’s no surprise we often saw multi-core performance improvements in the 2-3 percent range, which is negligible.

Looking at the overall performance summary, in the best case scenario we’re seeing a 10% gain in lightly or single-threaded apps, but this does vary depending on the test and for the most part we'd say the processors are about a match. And this carries through to looking at limited 8750H testing. Multi-core performance has only improved by a few percent in Cinebench, the major gains have come from raising the clock speed limit for single-core.

Compared to Intel’s other Core i7 CPU which offers 8 cores, the Core i7-10875H, the 10750H is universally slower as expected. At times it’s around 10 percent slower in single-thread workloads, but can be up around 20 to 25 percent slower in multi-thread. Given most higher-end 10750H laptops do have a more expensive 10875H option or even something with the Core i9-10980HK, this is the sort of performance you’re missing out on.

And then comparing the Core i7-10750H to the Ryzen 7 4800H, it’s a bit of a bloodbath for the Intel processor. With both CPUs limited to 45W, Ryzen is offering better multicore performance and better single-core performance in almost every instance. If you have productivity workloads that are mostly multi-core, the performance benefit Ryzen provides with 8 Zen 2 cores on 7nm is very significant.

Our overall thoughts on the Core i7-10750H can be summarized neatly in a single word: unimpressive. Intel is offering the same performance as the last-generation i7-9750H with a few very small improvements, which in effect is the same performance as the Core i7-8750H from two generations ago. For productivity performance, there is no reason to consider an upgrade.

The only way you’ll be getting more performance with a new Intel chip in this segment is if you buy a laptop that allows to run the CPU with a higher power limit. If you had a 45W laptop and can upgrade to something with enough cooling to allow 60W or 70W, you’ll be facing a 15 to 20 percent improvement. But this isn’t an actual performance gain from the 10th-gen CPU, it’s a performance gain from having a laptop with a better cooler.

Because Intel has kept offering two-year-old performance at the same price point, AMD has been able to swoop in and shake up the laptop market with a much faster processor in this category. The Ryzen 7 4800H is, for the most part, double digit percentages faster with the same power usage and this lead can be 50% or higher when fed a workload that can utilize all of its 8 cores.

This conversation can get a bit muddied when you factor in all the power limits and configurations that OEMs offer. But given we’ve seen Intel still failing to beat AMD’s 45W processor with a 90W 8-core option.

The apparent reality this generation is that any laptop using a Core i7-10750H could most likely be faster and better for productivity or creator workloads had it used a Ryzen 7 4800H instead. Even with this MSI GS66 Stealth, and we’ll be honest it’s a very nice laptop, yet it’s missing out on the 50% productivity performance bump from Ryzen.

Or to look at it another way, in the portable H-series category, the MSI GS66 is easily beaten for productivity by the smaller and more affordable Asus Zephyrus G14. The G14 is $300 cheaper, a 14-inch design instead of 15-inches and weighs 500 grams less. That’s the real-world benefit AMD is providing right now, albeit in a limited number of systems.

Shopping Shortcuts

158 interactions


I7 benchmark intel 9750h

The Intel Core i7-9750H is a 6 core and 12 thread processor configuration with 4.5GHz clock speed and 12MB L3 cache. The Intel Core i7-9750H is a "Kaby/Coffee/Whiskey Lake" processor. Some of the prominent capabilities of the processor include SSE 4.2 + AVX + AVX2 + AES + Intel VT-d + FMA + RdRand + FSGSBASE + BMI2. Prominent impacted bugs/vulnerabilities of the processor include Meltdown, Spectre V1, Spectre V2, Spectre V4 / SSBD, L1 Terminal Fault / Foreshadow, Microarchitectural Data Sampling, SWAPGS, and iTLB Multihit. This processor has been found on since Q2'2019 and found in approximately 10,919 results on

Compare The Intel Core i7-9750H Against Other CPUs.

Below is a generalized look at the performance across various test profiles and where relevant the different test profile options exposed for a high-level look at the performance compared to all available public test results on Of the 153 test profiles the overall rank was approximately in the 37th percentile.

To find individual public results matching this component, use the integrated Google site search page.

processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 158 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9750H CPU @ 2.60GHz stepping : 10 microcode : 0xd6 cpu MHz : 1100.65 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 39 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management:Architecture: x86_64 CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian Address sizes: 39 bits physical, 48 bits virtual CPU(s): 12 On-line CPU(s) list: 0-11 Thread(s) per core: 2 Core(s) per socket: 6 Socket(s): 1 NUMA node(s): 1 Vendor ID: GenuineIntel CPU family: 6 Model: 158 Model name: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9750H CPU @ 2.60GHz Stepping: 10 CPU MHz: 1113.180 CPU max MHz: 4500.0000 CPU min MHz: 800.0000 BogoMIPS: 5202.65 Virtualization: VT-x L1d cache: 192 KiB L1i cache: 192 KiB L2 cache: 1.
Intel i7-9750H vs i7-10710U - Laptop CPU Comparison and Benchmarks

Effective Speed -21%Effective Speed -21%Average Score -34%1-Core -33%, 4-Core -43%, 2-Core -37%, 8-Core -59%, Memory -1%Overclocked Score -21%1-Core -20%, 2-Core -22%, 4-Core -25%, 8-Core -35%, Memory -1%Value & Sentiment -62%User Rating -63%, Market Share -60%Nice To Haves -74%64-Core -44%, 64-Core -78%, Age -100%

 Market Share (See Leaders)

The number of benchmark samples for this model as a percentage of all 47,273,689 CPUs tested.

UHD Graphics 630IntelBench 5%, 405,550 samples4,202x
GTX 1660-Ti (Mobile)NvidiaBench 65%, 62,407 samples2,880x
RTX 2060 (Mobile)NvidiaBench 70%, 83,289 samples1,192x

Popular Core i7-9750H systems:


Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on real world performance.
  • Fastest real world speed - Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.


DescriptionIntel® Core™ i7-9750H Processor
Launch DateQ2'19
Processor Numberi7-9750H
# of Cores6
# of Threads12
Cache12 MB SmartCache
Instruction Set64-bit
Instruction Set ExtensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
Embedded Options AvailableNo
Lithography14 nm
Clock Speed2.60 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency4.50 GHz
Bus Speed8 GT/s DMI
Max TDP45 W


Processor GraphicsIntel® UHD Graphics 630
Graphics Base Frequency350 MHz
Graphics OutputeDP/DP/HDMI/DVI
# of Displays Supported3
Graphics Max Dynamic Frequency1.15 GHz
Quick Sync VideoYes
InTru 3D TechYes
Clear Video HD TechYes
Clear Video Tech for MIDYes
Graphics Video Max Memory64 GB


Max Memory Size128 GB
Memory TypesDDR4-2666, LPDDR3-2133
Memory Channels2
Memory Bandwidth41.8 GB/s
ECC Memory SupportedNo

Expansion Options

PCI Express Revision3.0
PCI Express ConfigurationsUp to 1x16, 2x8, 1x8+2x4
Max # of PCI Express Lanes16

Data Protection

AES New InstructionsYes
Secure KeyYes

Advanced Technologies

Virtualization Tech (VT-x)Yes
Intel 64Yes
Idle StatesYes
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® TechYes
Thermal Monitoring TechnologiesYes
Turbo Boost Tech2.0
Hyper-Threading TechYes
Virtualization for Directed I/O (VT-d)Yes
VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT)Yes
Identity Protection TechYes
Flex Memory AccessYes
Stable Image Platform Program (SIPP)No
My WiFi TechYes
Speed Shift TechnologyYes


Package Size42mm x 28mm
Max CPU Configuration1
Sockets SupportedFCBGA1440

Platform Protection

Execute Disable BitYes
OS GuardYes
Trusted Execution TechNo

 Frequently Asked Questions


Similar news:

I have not yet had time to swallow your sperm, as my mouth is filled with a new portion. I swallow everything convulsively. Yura says that he has not yet had such a cool girl like me, and I am very pleased. We break up after kissing each other and agreeing on the next meeting.

1911 1912 1913 1914 1915