CPU Comparison
Intel Core i7-4710HQ vs Intel Core i7-4750HQ
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i7-4710HQ is a performance-oriented mobile processor launched in April 2014 as a minor refresh to the successful Haswell lineup. Designed for mid-range gaming laptops and portable workstations, it features four cores and eight threads, delivering solid multitasking capabilities. Operating at a base frequency of 2.5 GHz with turbo boosts up to 3.5 GHz, it offered a marginal clock speed bump over its predecessor, the 4700HQ. It retains the Intel HD Graphics 4600, meaning it relies on discrete GPUs for serious graphical workloads, a common pairing in the laptops it inhabited. Built on a 22nm process with a 47-watt TDP, it fits into the standard performance tier for mobile computing of its time. Though now end-of-life, the 4710HQ served as a reliable engine for students and professionals alike, offering enough computational headroom for video editing, coding, and gaming without breaking the bank during the mid-2010s.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Good multi-threaded performance for everyday apps.
Strong quad-core performance, slightly limited by 2.0GHz base.
Gaming
Handles older eSports titles but bottlenecks modern GPUs.
Excellent integrated graphics for older 1080p titles.
Virtualization
Can handle basic VM setups.
Capable of running standard VMs.
Efficiency
47W TDP is outdated by modern mobile standards.
47W TDP is standard but outdated.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No AI acceleration
- No AI hardware
Content Creation
Gaming
- Bottlenecks modern GPUs
- Great for 2014-era titles
- Iris Pro 5200 rivals entry-level discrete GPUs
- Great for 2013 games
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Reliable quad-core performance
- 100MHz bump over 4700HQ
- Good turbo headroom
- Widely compatible laptop ecosystem
Cons
- Soldered to motherboard
- No eDRAM
- Outdated 22nm process
- Poor efficiency by modern standards
Pros
- Iris Pro 5200 graphics
- 128MB L4 eDRAM
- Quad-core multitasking
- Good turbo boost headroom
Cons
- Low 2.0GHz base clock
- 47W TDP runs warm
- Soldered BGA package
- Outdated 22nm process
Competitors & Alternatives
Intel Core i7-4710HQ
- AMD A10-7300MRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4700HQRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i5-4210HRival
Mobile
- AMD FX-7600PRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i7-4720HQRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i5-9300HAlt
Modern budget gaming alternative.
- AMD Ryzen 5 4600HAlt
Vastly superior modern mobile performance.
- Alt
Massive leap in efficiency.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core i7-4750HQ
- AMD A10-5750MRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4700HQRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-3635QMRival
Mobile
- AMD FX-7600PRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4760HQRival
Mobile
- AMD Ryzen 7 5700UAlt
Modern alternative with excellent integrated graphics.
- Intel Core i7-1165G7Alt
Massive leap in mobile efficiency and iGPU.
- Alt
Modern premium laptop alternative.
Compare head-to-head
Our Verdict on Each
A solid Haswell refresh that provided reliable quad-core performance for mid-2010s gaming laptops.
Best for: If you are considering a laptop with an Intel Core i7-4710HQ today, it should strictly be a budget-conscious purchase, likely under two hundred dollars. The processor is end-of-life and lacks the modern efficiency and single-core speed required for today's demanding software. However, for light office work, web browsing, or playing older games like CS:GO or League of Legends, it still performs admirably. If you are repairing a laptop, this chip is a direct drop-in replacement for other 47-watt Haswell HQ processors on BGA 1364 motherboards, though soldering is required. Ensure the laptop's cooling system is completely functional, as a 47W chip will overheat quickly in a clogged heatsink. Do not buy this expecting to run modern AAA titles or edit 4K video. Treat it as a capable legacy machine for basic productivity, retro gaming, or as an educational tool for learning computer hardware repair.
Read the full reviewA groundbreaking mobile processor that brought console-class integrated graphics to thin laptops.
Best for: Finding a device with an Intel Core i7-4750HQ today is rare, as it was an expensive, premium part upon release. If you locate a used laptop with this chip, it is likely an older MacBook Pro or a high-end ultrabook. The integrated HD 5200 graphics still hold up surprisingly well for older games and media consumption, making it a decent option for a portable retro gaming machine. However, the 2.0 GHz base clock means CPU-heavy tasks will feel sluggish compared to modern processors. If you are repairing a vintage premium laptop, this CPU is essential for restoring functionality. Do not pay a premium price for a system with this processor today. Its value lies strictly in nostalgia or maintaining a legacy creative workstation. For modern efficiency and performance, even a low-end current-generation Celeron will outclass it in battery life and single-core speed. Approach it as a collector’s item or budget retro rig.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Intel Core i7-4710HQ or Intel Core i7-4750HQ?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core i7-4750HQ comes out ahead with a score of 7.5/10. 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, Intel Core i7-4710HQ or Intel Core i7-4750HQ?
For gaming, the Intel Core i7-4750HQ leads with a gaming performance score of 70/100 among Intel Core i7-4710HQ and Intel Core i7-4750HQ.
Do Intel Core i7-4710HQ and Intel Core i7-4750HQ use the same socket?
Yes — all of these CPUs use the Intel BGA 1364 socket, so they share compatible motherboards.
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The Intel Core i7-4750HQ posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core i7-4710HQ (7,500), Intel Core i7-4750HQ (8,000). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.