Mobile Gaming: Can Core i7-2920XM Beat Desktop Core i7-980X?
Table of contents
- 1. So, You Thought Notebooks Were Weak?
- 2. Test Settings
- 3. Benchmark Results: SiSoftware Sandra CPU
- 4. Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- 5. Benchmark Results: Productivity
- 6. Benchmark Results: 3DMark Vantage
We've already seen Intel's Sandy Bridge architecture offer compelling performance gains on the desktop. But can the fastest second-gen Core i7 beat Intel's 130 W desktop-oriented six-core Core i7-980X in games? We set up a couple systems to find out.
Industry analysts have predicted the demise of the desktop PC almost every year since notebooks first started shipping with color screens. But extra room for power and cooling continues to push desktop performance at least two steps ahead of notebook counterparts. That performance disparity keeps a slowly-shrinking enthusiast PC market alive, even as improved notebooks all but consume other segments.
Enthusiasts alone can’t sustain the large manufacturing infrastructure left over from the desktop’s heyday, and we watch in despair as component firms either die or change targets. As we continue pushing new blood into the desktop market's veins, Intel is driving nails into its coffin with an architecture that delivers very compelling speed on a power budget.

Enthusiasts could view the company's so-called “second-generation Core architecture” as a performance upgrade or a compatibility killer, but reduced power consumption appears to be the real reason behind a broad range of evolutionary changes beyond Intel's Nehalem-based CPUs. The architecture's vastly-improved HD Graphics 3000, for example, isn’t designed to thrill value-seekers as much as to encourage them not to use power-hungry discrete cards, with its related Quick Sync function disabled whenever another GPU is added. Desktop buyers even have to pay a premium to get the full feature set in the form of a K-series processor, while notebook customers can take it for granted, since all mobile Sandy Bridge chips include 12 execution units.

The result of Intel’s efficiency push is a notebook processor that, with its high IPC and GPU-related killer app, could push everyone but gamers towards its notebook portfolio. Yet, that same ultra-efficient design and power-friendly thermals may combine to create a notebook CPU that can take on Intel's best desktop rival in games. The Core i7-2920XM can ramp up to a super-high 3.50 GHz under load, thanks to a wide range of Turbo Boost multipliers.

Of course the i7-980X has six cores (rather than four) and a 100 MHz higher Turbo Boosted frequency. But those are just the complications needed to make this an interesting comparison.
Latest Notebooks News
- 24/05 – HP Announces Plans to Lay off 27,000 in Next Two Years
- 23/05 – Intel Hopes New Batteries Can Reduce Ultrabook Cost
- 15/05 – Ivy Bridge-based MacBook Pro and iMac Benchmarked
- 14/05 – Report: Intel-powered Win 8 Tablets in Stores by November
- 14/05 – Rumor: Next 15-inch MacBook Pro to Pack Retina Display
Latest Notebooks reviews
- 17/05 – Gaming On A Netbook? 13 Great Titles Playable At 720p
- 15/05 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 24/04 – Asus Transformer Pad TF300T Review: Tegra 3, More Affordable
- 23/01 – Radeon HD 6990M And GeForce GTX 580M: A Beautiful Lie
- 03/01 – Eurocom Racer: Radeon HD 6990M In A Truly Mobile Form Factor
Very impressive performance by the 2920XM. I have to admit to being surprised by those results!
Impressive CPU performance, but it's still the GPU that matters at the end of the day. And it's there that notebooks can't keep up with desktops yet.
I Too, was a little surprised,but its irrelevant. How would the 2920xm fair against the 2600k? Does somebody with enough knowledge and budget to buy these parts go to the expense and trouble then NOT Overclock the ghoolies out of them? No. The power available at any point in time at a desktop will always be proportionaly higher than in a laptop because they will be based on the same technology and have the same constraints.I notice nowhere in this article was the cost of the 2920 xm mentioned. I bet its a lot more expensive to buy one than a 2600k!
same technology and have the same constraints not..
Mobile CPU, and Xeons are more power efficient than cheaper Desktop counter parts.