CPU Comparison
Apple M1 vs Intel Core i7-3740QM
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Apple M1 is an 8-core ARM-based system-on-a-chip (SoC) that marked Apple’s transition from Intel to its own Apple Silicon for the Mac, combining four high‑performance and four efficiency cores, an 8‑core integrated GPU, and a 16‑core Neural Engine on a 5 nm process.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Very responsive for everyday tasks, Xcode builds, and light creative work; benefits from fast single‑core and SSD, but heavy multi‑thread workloads are constrained by 8 threads.
8 threads and high clocks make quick work of office and compiling tasks.
Gaming
Competent for 1080p gaming in macOS and via Rosetta 2 for many titles, but the 8‑core GPU and 8–16 GB memory limit modern AAA performance and resolution scaling.
Handles older games easily and provides good frame rates with a discrete GPU.
Virtualization
Capable for a couple of light VMs, but not ideal for large parallel VM farms due to core count and memory ceiling.
Good for running light VMs on the go.
Efficiency
Outstanding performance per watt; MacBook Air and 13‑inch MacBook Pro with M1 delivered dramatically better battery life and lower heat than comparable Intel Macs.
22nm Ivy Bridge is less efficient than modern mobile chips.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- 16‑core Neural Engine accelerates Core ML models
- CPU and GPU also provide ML accelerators for framework‑level ops
- Not designed for large‑scale training or server‑side inference
- No AI hardware
- CPU inference is slow
Content Creation
Gaming
- 8‑core GPU comparable to low‑end discrete GPUs of its era in some Metal titles
- Rosetta 2 adds overhead for x86 games; some titles have compatibility or performance quirks
- 16 GB memory limit and 8 GPU cores cap texture resolutions and frame rates in modern AAA games
- Excellent for 2012-era games
- Won't bottleneck mid-range mobile GPUs
- Needs discrete graphics for serious gaming
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Excellent single‑thread performance and responsiveness
- Outstanding performance per watt and battery life
- Integrated GPU much faster than old Intel UHD/Iris in Macs
- Unified memory simplifies development and improves efficiency
- Silent, fanless operation in MacBook Air and Mac mini under light loads
- Strong on‑device ML inference via Neural Engine
Cons
- Only 8 CPU threads; heavy multi‑thread workloads can hit a ceiling
- Max 16 GB unified memory; not user‑upgradeable
- No eGPU support and limited PCIe expansion
- Rosetta 2 translation layer for some x86 apps; not all software is native
- Newer M2/M3 chips and modern x86 CPUs offer more cores, higher clocks, and better GPU performance
Pros
- Good quad-core performance
- High 3.7 GHz turbo boost
- Removable PGA socket option
- Decent 6MB L3 cache
Cons
- High 45W TDP
- Older 22nm process
- DDR3 only
- Runs hot under load
Competitors & Alternatives
Apple M1
- Intel Core i7-1165G7Rival
Thin‑and‑Light Laptop
- AMD Ryzen 7 5800URival
Thin‑and‑Light Laptop
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5-1135G7Rival
Thin‑and‑Light Laptop
- AMD Ryzen 5 4600HRival
Performance Laptop
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-11800HRival
High‑Performance Laptop
- Alt
Same platform with ~18% faster CPU, 35% faster GPU, and support for up to 24 GB unified memory.
Compare head-to-head - Alt
More CPU/GPU cores and higher memory bandwidth for heavier creative workloads.
Compare head-to-head - AMD Ryzen 7 6800UAlt
Modern x86 laptop CPU with higher multi‑thread performance and DDR5 memory.
Higher core count and better sustained multi‑thread performance in thin laptops.
Compare head-to-head- Alt
Newer architecture with better GPU and CPU performance per watt and improved media engines.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core i7-3740QM
- AMD A10-4600MRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-3630QMRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-3720QMRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i7-3940XMRival
Mobile Extreme
- AMD FX-7600PRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i7-4700MQAlt
Newer Haswell architecture.
- AMD Ryzen 5 3500UAlt
Modern mobile alternative with vastly superior efficiency.
- Intel Core i5-8300HAlt
Much faster and more efficient for budget gaming.
- Alt
Incredible performance per watt.
Compare head-to-head
Our Verdict on Each
A landmark chip that delivered class‑leading efficiency and single‑thread speed for thin laptops, still very capable for most users but increasingly outdated compared to M2/M3 and modern x86 rivals in multi‑thread and GPU workloads.
Best for: Used or refurbished M1 MacBook Air / Mac mini for general use, study, or light creative work at a low price
Read the full reviewA high-end mobile CPU for its time, offering excellent multi-threaded performance and high clock speeds for demanding applications.
Best for: Buying a cheap, used laptop for retro gaming or basic coding.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Apple M1 or Intel Core i7-3740QM?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Apple M1 comes out ahead with a score of 8.8/10. That said, the best choice depends on your workload — check the spec and performance breakdown above for gaming, productivity and efficiency differences.
Which is faster for gaming, Apple M1 or Intel Core i7-3740QM?
For gaming, the Apple M1 leads with a gaming performance score of 72/100 among Apple M1 and Intel Core i7-3740QM.
Which uses less power?
The Intel Core i7-3740QM has the lowest rated TDP. Power draw across these chips: Intel Core i7-3740QM (45 W).
Do Apple M1 and Intel Core i7-3740QM use the same socket?
No. They use different sockets (Apple M1: On-package (BGA-style, not user-replaceable), Intel Core i7-3740QM: Intel Socket G2 (988B)), so each needs a compatible motherboard.
Which has more cores?
The Apple M1 has the most cores. Core counts: Apple M1 (8 cores), Intel Core i7-3740QM (4 cores).
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The Apple M1 posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Apple M1 (7,404), Intel Core i7-3740QM (5,400). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.