CPU Comparison
Core i7-4850EQ vs Intel Core i7-4960HQ
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i7-4850EQ is a mobile processor launched in 2013, designed for embedded systems and high-performance mobile workstations. Built on the 22-nanometer Haswell architecture, it was part of the Crystalwell family, notable for integrating a massive 128 MB L4 eDRAM cache. The processor features four cores and eight threads, operating at a base frequency of 1.6 GHz and boosting up to 3.2 GHz. This low base clock and high turbo capability allowed it to scale efficiently based on thermal loads. It includes 8 MB of L3 cache and integrates Intel HD Graphics 5200, also known as Iris Pro, which utilizes the eDRAM for massive bandwidth gains. With a 47-watt thermal design power, it was engineered for devices requiring desktop-class graphics and compute power in constrained mobile or embedded form factors. Though end-of-life, it remains a historically significant chip for its innovative packaging indeed.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Solid quad-core performance for professional workloads.
The 8MB cache helps with productivity tasks.
Gaming
Iris Pro 5200 allowed for 1080p medium gaming in 2013.
Good for older games, but lacks power for modern AAA titles.
Virtualization
Good VM performance with VT-d and quad cores.
Handles VMs well for legacy systems.
Efficiency
22nm process and 47W TDP result in high heat by modern standards.
22nm process is less efficient than modern alternatives.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No AI hardware
- eDRAM does not benefit modern AI significantly
- No AI-specific hardware
- Slow inference
Content Creation
Gaming
- Comparable to entry-level discrete GPUs of its era
- eDRAM provides stable frame rates
- Good for 720p/1080p medium gaming
- eDRAM helps with frame rates
- Adequate for indie games
- Not suitable for modern high-end gaming
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Iris Pro 5200 with 128MB eDRAM
- Quad-core performance for 2013
- Good for embedded applications
- Large 8MB L3 cache
Cons
- High 47W TDP
- 22nm process is inefficient
- DDR3 memory only
- Soldered to motherboard
- Obsolete for modern tasks
Pros
- Still active for embedded markets
- 8MB L3 cache
- Strong Iris Pro integrated graphics
Cons
- Outdated 22nm process
- High 47W TDP
- Expensive if bought new for embedded use
Competitors & Alternatives
Core i7-4850EQ
- AMD A10-5750MRival
Mobile APU
- Intel Core i7-4700MQRival
Mobile Performance
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-4900MQRival
Mobile Workstation
- Intel Core i7-5700HQAlt
Broadwell successor with better efficiency and 14nm process.
- AMD Ryzen 7 5700UAlt
Modern 8-core alternative with vastly superior graphics.
- Alt
Massive leap in mobile CPU and GPU efficiency.
Compare head-to-head Modern 10nm alternative with better graphics and efficiency.
Compare head-to-head6-core alternative that offers much more performance.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core i7-4960HQ
- AMD A10-5750MRival
Mobile
- Intel Core i7-4700MQRival
Mobile
- AMD FX-7600PRival
Mobile
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-3632QMRival
Mobile
- Qualcomm Snapdragon 800Rival
Mobile
- AMD Ryzen 7 5800UAlt
Vastly superior efficiency and multi-core performance.
- Intel Core i7-1185G7Alt
Modern architecture with much faster single-core speeds.
- Alt
Incredible performance per watt for mobile workstations.
Compare head-to-head Hybrid architecture offers significantly better multi-threading.
Compare head-to-head- AMD Ryzen 5 5625UAlt
Modern budget alternative with strong battery life.
Our Verdict on Each
An innovative 4th Gen processor that brought console-like eDRAM architecture to mobile PCs, offering excellent integrated graphics for its time.
Best for: Industrial retrofitting or restoring a legacy MacBook Pro.
Read the full reviewA robust mobile processor that still sees use in embedded systems due to its reliable 22nm architecture and eDRAM.
Best for: Industrial or legacy system replacement. When considering the purchase of a system with the Core i7-4960HQ today, the context is crucial. For modern consumer use, it is heavily outdated and outperformed by even low-tier contemporary processors. However, because it remains listed as active for embedded markets, it may still be relevant for specific industrial systems requiring legacy support. For general consumers, buying a used laptop with this CPU should only be done at a rock-bottom price. It remains functional for basic computing tasks and older games, but its power efficiency pales in comparison to current architectures. Do not invest in this platform for a primary work or gaming machine today.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Core i7-4850EQ or Intel Core i7-4960HQ?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Core i7-4850EQ 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, Core i7-4850EQ or Intel Core i7-4960HQ?
For gaming, the Intel Core i7-4960HQ leads with a gaming performance score of 46/100 among Core i7-4850EQ and Intel Core i7-4960HQ.
Do Core i7-4850EQ and Intel Core i7-4960HQ 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 i7-4960HQ posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core i7-4960HQ (8,600). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.