CPU Comparison

Core i7-880 vs Intel Core i7-930

A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i7-880 is a high-end desktop processor launched in May 2010, based on the 45nm Lynnfield architecture. It represents the highest bin of the Lynnfield silicon, operating at a base frequency of 3.066 GHz and boosting up to 3.733 GHz via Turbo Boost. It features 4 cores and 8 threads, supported by an 8 MB L3 cache. Utilizing the LGA 1156 socket, it brought the Nehalem microarchitecture to its peak performance on the mainstream platform. It integrates a dual-channel DDR3 memory controller and 16 PCIe 2.0 lanes directly on the CPU. Like other Lynnfield chips, it lacks an integrated GPU. With a 95W TDP, it was relatively easy to cool for its clock speed. The i7-880 was a quiet release, often overshadowed by the unlocked i7-875K, but it remains the fastest stock-clocked Lynnfield CPU, offering excellent performance for its era, though obsolete today.

Intel · Core i7
Core i7-880
4C / 8T3.733 GHz95 W
8
Full review
Top pick
Intel · Core i7
Intel Core i7-930
4C / 8T3.06 GHz130 W
8.5
Full review

The Bottom Line

Overview & Launch

Brand
Intel
Intel
Market
Desktop
Desktop
Segment
Desktop High-End
Desktop
Generation
Core i7 (Lynnfield)
1st Generation (Nehalem)
Launched
2010
2010
Status
End-of-life
End-of-life
Codename
Lynnfield
Bloomfield
Series
Core i7
Core i7
Family
1st Gen Core i7
Bloomfield
Predecessor
Core i7-870
Intel Core i7-920
Successor
Core i7-2600
Intel Core i7-960

Specifications Compared

Cores & Clocks
Cores
4
4
Threads
8
8
Base Clock
3.066 GHz
2.8 GHz
Boost Clock
3.733 GHz
3.06 GHz
Cache & Power
L3 Cache
8 MB
8 MB
TDP
95 W
130 W
Architecture
Architecture
Lynnfield
Nehalem (Bloomfield)
Process Node
45nm
45nm
Memory
Memory Type
DDR3
DDR3
Memory Speed
1333 MT/s
DDR3-1066
Memory Channels
Dual (2)
Triple (3)
Max Memory
24 GB
Platform & I/O
Socket
Intel Socket 1156
LGA 1366
PCIe Version
Gen 2
PCIe 2.0
PCIe Lanes
16
36
Integrated GPU
None
None
Unlocked
No
No

Performance Compared

Productivity

Core i7-880Best39

Fastest Lynnfield at stock, but obsolete now.

Intel Core i7-93028

8 threads help, but low IPC limits modern productivity.

Gaming

Core i7-880Best38

Handles old games well but bottlenecks modern titles.

Intel Core i7-93032

Bottlenecks modern GPUs but handles 2010-era games perfectly.

Virtualization

Core i7-88042

Good for legacy VMs.

Intel Core i7-93042

Good for basic VMs and legacy server setups.

Efficiency

Core i7-880Best40

95W TDP is acceptable for 45nm at these clocks.

Intel Core i7-93010

130W TDP is highly inefficient for a quad-core.

Specialized Performance

AI / ML

Core i7-880None
  • No AI hardware
  • Unsuitable for modern inference
Intel Core i7-930None
  • Incompatible with modern AI workloads

Content Creation

Core i7-880Legacy
Legacy PremierePhotoshop3D Modeling
Intel Core i7-930Poor (Modern)
Basic 1080p Editing (Legacy)

Gaming

Core i7-880Legacy
  • PCIe 2.0 only
  • No AVX support
  • Requires discrete GPU
Intel Core i7-930Poor (Modern)
  • Low IPC
  • No AVX2
  • Bottlenecks modern titles

Industry Impact

Gaming
Moderate
Moderate
Workstations
Low
Moderate
Content Creation
Moderate
Moderate
Virtualization
Moderate
Low

Best CPU by Use Case

High-End Gaming
Excellent (for 2010)
Video Editing
Very Good
3D Rendering
Good
Streaming
Moderate
Retro Gaming
Very Good
Legacy Video Editing
Good
Basic Virtualization
Good
Modern Gaming
Poor
Modern Office Work
Poor

Target Audience

Gamers
Targeted
Targeted
Content Creators
Targeted
Targeted
Developers
Targeted
Targeted
Workstation Users
Targeted
Streamers
Targeted
Office / Productivity
Students

Strengths & Weaknesses

Core i7-880

Pros

  • Highest stock Lynnfield clocks
  • 8MB L3 cache
  • Quad-core with HT
  • Good 2010 performance

Cons

  • Obsolete platform
  • No integrated graphics
  • Locked multiplier
  • Rare and expensive
Intel Core i7-930

Pros

  • Good overclocking headroom (D0 stepping)
  • Affordable at launch
  • Hyper-Threading for 8 threads
  • Triple-channel memory support
  • Reliable workhorse for its era

Cons

  • High 130W TDP
  • Locked CPU multiplier
  • Obsolete platform
  • Lacks modern instruction sets
  • Poor single-core performance today

Competitors & Alternatives

Core i7-880

  • AMD Phenom II X4 965

    Desktop High-End

    Rival
  • Intel Core i7-875K

    Desktop Enthusiast

    Rival
  • Intel Core i7-930

    Desktop High-End

    Rival
    Compare head-to-head
  • AMD Phenom II X6 1090T

    Desktop Enthusiast

    Rival
  • Intel Core i7-870

    Desktop High-End

    Rival
  • Intel Core i7-2600
    Alt

    The direct Sandy Bridge successor.

Intel Core i7-930

Our Verdict on Each

Core i7-880Situational

The ultimate Lynnfield chip with the highest stock clocks, though overshadowed by the 875K and obsolete today.

Best for: Maintaining a legacy retro gaming rig.

Read the full review

A solid incremental update to the 920. It offered great value for LGA 1366 builders but is obsolete today.

Best for: Retro build or cheap replacement for a dead LGA 1366 CPU.

Read the full review

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, Core i7-880 or Intel Core i7-930?

Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core i7-930 comes out ahead with a score of 8.5/10. 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 i7-880 or Intel Core i7-930?

For gaming, the Core i7-880 leads with a gaming performance score of 38/100 among Core i7-880 and Intel Core i7-930.

Which uses less power?

The Core i7-880 has the lowest rated TDP. Power draw across these chips: Core i7-880 (95 W), Intel Core i7-930 (130 W).

Do Core i7-880 and Intel Core i7-930 use the same socket?

No. They use different sockets (Core i7-880: Intel Socket 1156, Intel Core i7-930: LGA 1366), so each needs a compatible motherboard.

Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?

The Intel Core i7-930 posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core i7-930 (0). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.