CPU Comparison
Intel Core i7-4760HQ vs Intel Core i7-4850HQ
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i7-4760HQ is a premium mobile processor released in February 2014, bridging the gap between standard Haswell parts and the top-tier Crystalwell variants. Designed for high-end laptops and portable workstations, it features four cores and eight threads to handle demanding workloads. Operating at a base frequency of 2.1 GHz with turbo speeds up to 3.3 GHz, it offers a slight uptick in CPU performance over the 4750HQ. Crucially, it integrates Intel HD Graphics 5200, backed by 128MB of L4 eDRAM, delivering exceptional graphical performance for an integrated solution. This made it ideal for thin-and-light systems requiring capable 1080p gaming and media encoding without the added heat of a discrete GPU. With a 47-watt TDP, it required robust cooling. Though end-of-life, the 4760HQ was a versatile chip that offered a balanced blend of computational speed and best-in-class integrated graphics for its era.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Better CPU clocks than 4750HQ improve responsiveness.
High turbo clocks ensure smooth performance.
Gaming
Excellent integrated graphics for 2014 titles.
Excellent integrated graphics for 2013 titles.
Virtualization
Capable of running standard VMs.
Handles standard VMs well.
Efficiency
47W TDP is standard for its class.
47W TDP is standard but outdated.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No AI hardware
- No AI hardware
Content Creation
Gaming
- Iris Pro handles older games well
- Comparable to GT 740M
- Iris Pro handles older 1080p games well
- Rivals entry-level discrete GPUs
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Iris Pro 5200 graphics
- 128MB L4 eDRAM
- Good 3.3GHz turbo boost
- Solid quad-core performance
Cons
- Soldered BGA package
- 47W TDP runs warm
- Outdated 22nm process
- Low availability
Pros
- High 3.5GHz turbo boost
- Iris Pro 5200 graphics
- 128MB L4 eDRAM
- Strong quad-core performance
Cons
- Soldered BGA package
- 47W TDP requires good cooling
- Outdated 22nm process
- End-of-life
Competitors & Alternatives
Intel Core i7-4760HQ
- AMD A10-7300MRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4750HQRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4700HQRival
Mobile
- AMD FX-7600PRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4770HQRival
Mobile
- AMD Ryzen 7 5700UAlt
Modern alternative with vastly better efficiency.
- Intel Core i7-1165G7Alt
Modern premium laptop alternative.
- Alt
Massive leap in integrated graphics and efficiency.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core i7-4850HQ
- AMD A10-5750MRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4750HQRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i7-3840QMRival
Mobile
- AMD FX-7600PRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4860HQRival
Mobile
- AMD Ryzen 7 5800HAlt
Modern mobile powerhouse alternative.
Modern alternative with massive multi-core gains.
Compare head-to-head- Alt
Modern creator laptop alternative.
Compare head-to-head
Our Verdict on Each
A well-balanced mobile processor offering a slight clock bump over the 4750HQ while retaining excellent Iris Pro graphics.
Best for: An Intel Core i7-4760HQ is a rare find today, typically only encountered when repairing older premium ultrabooks or all-in-one systems. If you are considering a purchase, the primary value lies in its Iris Pro graphics. For retro gaming or running older creative suites, the HD 5200 combined with the quad-core CPU still provides a surprisingly capable experience. However, the 47-watt TDP means battery life in older laptops will be poor, and thermals can be an issue if the machine hasn't been cleaned and repasted. If you are sourcing this chip for a board-level repair, ensure you have the correct BGA reballing equipment, as it is permanently soldered. For everyday use, modern budget laptops will outperform this chip in efficiency and single-core tasks. Only invest in a system with this CPU if it is exceptionally cheap, serving as a secondary device for light media creation or nostalgic gaming sessions.
Read the full reviewA flagship 2013 mobile processor combining strong quad-core clocks with the graphical prowess of Iris Pro and eDRAM.
Best for: If you are sourcing an Intel Core i7-4850HQ today, it is likely for repairing a vintage premium laptop, such as a 2013 MacBook Pro. The processor is end-of-life, but its 3.5 GHz turbo and HD 5200 graphics still pack a punch for retro gaming and 1080p media editing. When evaluating a system with this chip, pay close attention to the thermal paste and fan condition; a 47W Haswell chip will throttle heavily if overheating. If you are performing a BGA replacement, ensure your soldering profile matches the 1364 ball grid array. For general consumers, do not purchase a laptop with this CPU as a primary machine. Modern budget processors offer vastly superior battery life and single-core performance. However, if you need a cheap, capable machine for running older creative software or acting as a localized media server, a functional 4850HQ system can still provide excellent value at the right price.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Intel Core i7-4760HQ or Intel Core i7-4850HQ?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core i7-4850HQ comes out ahead with a score of 7.8/10. 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, Intel Core i7-4760HQ or Intel Core i7-4850HQ?
For gaming, the Intel Core i7-4850HQ leads with a gaming performance score of 75/100 among Intel Core i7-4760HQ and Intel Core i7-4850HQ.
Do Intel Core i7-4760HQ and Intel Core i7-4850HQ 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 i7-4850HQ posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core i7-4760HQ (8,100), Intel Core i7-4850HQ (8,400). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.