OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i7 1068g7 Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£260PassMark benchmark result:9161N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:4.1 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1526TDP (Thermal design power):28 W

Intel Core i7 1068g7 Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.1

Overall score

Score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 55% of models
Score components

90%

6.1

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–²Better than 55% of processors
6.1

Technical score

Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 56% of models
Score components

60%

6.0

Performance

18%

5.7

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

7.2

Platform

1%

7.1

Integrated Graphics

â–²Better than 56% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ £260

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i7 1068g7

Technical score
Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 56% of models
Score components:

60%

6.0

Performance

18%

5.7

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

7.2

Platform

1%

7.1

Integrated Graphics

6.1
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i7 1068g7 has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 61% of models
Score components:

60%

6.1

Overall score

40%

9.2

Price

7.0
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
mobile
Processor type
mobile
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 7.3% of processors and equal to that of 48.6% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1526
CPU socket
FCBGA1526
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
This processor uses the FCBGA1526 CPU socket, which is older than that of 79% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
N. of physical cores
4
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 50.7% of processors and equal to 28.5% of processors.
CPU threads
8
CPU threads
8
â–¼ Worse than 46% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 35.2% of processors and equal to 19.1% of processors.
Threads per core
2
Threads per core
2
â–² Better than 30% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.1 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.1 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.1 GHz which is lower than that of 56.2% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 2.3 GHz
CPU base clock speed
4x 2.3 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
This processor has a base clock of 4x2.3 GHz which is lower than that of 69.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Semiconductor size
10 nm
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 52.4% of processors and equal to that of 19.1% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 10 nm
Foundry
Intel 10 nm
â–² Better than 52% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 10 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 52.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
L3 cache
8 MB
L3 cache
8 MB
â–¼ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is larger than that of 39.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.8% of processors.
L2 cache
2 MB
L2 cache
2 MB
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 2 MB which is smaller than that of 51% of processors and equal to that of 11.2% of processors.
L1 cache
320 KB
L1 cache
320 KB
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 320 KB which is smaller than that of 55.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/LPDDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4/LPDDR4
â–² Better than 60% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4/LPDDR4, which is newer than that of 60.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,733 MHz
Maximum memory speed
3,733 MHz
â–² Better than 60% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,733 MHz, which is higher than that of 60.2% of processors and equal to 1.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-3733 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-3733 MHz
â–² Better than 57% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR4-3733 MHz, which is higher than that of 57.2% of processors and equal to 1% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 28.4% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Plus Graphics
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Plus Graphics
â–² Better than 65% of models
This processor uses the Intel Iris Plus Graphics integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 64.5% of processors and equal to that in 0.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
64
Integrated GPU execution units
64
â–² Better than 87% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 64 GPU execution units, which is more than 87.4% of processors and equal to 3.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 58.1% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VP8 (HW decode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VP8 (HW decode)
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
This processor supports VP8 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 80% of processors and equal to 0.6% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
28 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
28 W
â–² Better than 67% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 28 W which is lower than that of 67.5% of processors and equal to that of 7% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
28 W
Base power (PL1)
28 W
â–² Better than 67% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 28 W which is lower than that of 67.2% of processors and equal to that of 7.2% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
64 W
Boost power (PL2)
64 W
â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 64 W which is higher than that of 50.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 3.4% of processors and equal to that of 86.1% of processors.
Configurable TDP
?
Show more

Intel Core i7 1068g7 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 36% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,401
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,401 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,401 vs 2,500
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Ice Lake
    â–² Better than 55% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 31.1% smaller die size
    Die size
    122 mm²
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (122 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    122 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 37.8% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    28 W
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/LPDDR4
    â–² Better than 60% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4
  • Includes crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    This processor includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • More advanced foundry
    Foundry
    Intel 10 nm
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, Secure Key, SGX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Includes crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    This processor includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 36% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,401
    â–² Better than 75% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,401 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,401 vs 2,500
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Ice Lake
    â–² Better than 55% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 31.1% smaller die size
    Die size
    122 mm²
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (122 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    122 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • More advanced foundry
    Foundry
    Intel 10 nm
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 16.7% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    2 MB/core
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 16.7% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    10 nm
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (10 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    10 nm vs 12 nm
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/LPDDR4
    â–² Better than 60% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4
  • 27.3% higher memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    58.3 GB/s
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (58.3 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    58.3 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • 27.3% higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    3,733 MHz
    â–² Better than 60% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (3733 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    3,733 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • 2.67x more GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    64
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (64 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    64 vs 24
  • 37.8% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    28 W
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • 37.8% lower TDP
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    28 W
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VP8 (HW decode)
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP8 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    VP8 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • Lower base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    4 x 2.3 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (4x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    4x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 4.7% lower boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.1 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 50% lower bus speed
    Bus speed
    4 GT/s
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    Market range: <3 GT/s – >8 GT/s
    This processor has a lower bus speed than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor runs at bus speed of 8 GT/s.
    4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 50% lower bus transfer rate
    Bus transfer rate
    4 GT/s
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 GT/s – >19 GT/s
    This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 13.4% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    9,161
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (9,161 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    9,161 vs 10,572.5
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
    â–¼ Worse than 87% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1526
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1526 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1526 vs FP4
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • Lower base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    4 x 2.3 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (4x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    4x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 4.7% lower boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.1 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 50% lower bus speed
    Bus speed
    4 GT/s
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    Market range: <3 GT/s – >8 GT/s
    This processor has a lower bus speed than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor runs at bus speed of 8 GT/s.
    4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 13.4% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    9,161
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (9,161 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    9,161 vs 10,572.5
  • 50% lower bus transfer rate
    Bus transfer rate
    4 GT/s
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 GT/s – >19 GT/s
    This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 20% smaller L2 cache
    L2 cache
    2 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (2 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    2 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    PCIe bifurcation modes
    x16
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4).
    x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VP8 (HW decode)
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP8 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    VP8 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

C
cpubenchmark.net
No Date
Summary of the review
Intel Core i7-1068NG7 @ 2.30GHz - CPU Benchmarks
F
forums.macrumors.com
10/05/2020
Summary of the review
2020 i7 MBPro 1068NG7 benchmarks
H
hothardware.com
01/08/2019
Summary of the review
Intel 10nm Ice Lake Benchmarks: 10th Gen Core i7 Performance
G
galaxus.de
26/06/2020
Summary of the review
MacBook Air vs. Pro 13 vs. Pro 16: The Ultimate Comparison
(Translated)Show original
H
hardwareinside.de
03/08/2019
Summary of the review
Intel 10nm Ice Lake Benchmarks: 10th Gen Core i7 Performance Examined
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i7 1068g7

  • Improved IPC (Instructions Per Clock) by approximately 18% compared to previous generations like Skylake.
  • Enhanced Iris Plus Graphics (G7) with 64 execution units, offering a significant jump over older UHD families.
  • Efficient 10nm production process providing a good balance of performance and energy efficiency for ultrabooks.
  • Support for faster memory speeds up to 3200MHz DDR4 and 3733MHz LPDDR4X.
  • Includes AI hardware acceleration features like DL Boost.
  • Higher 28W TDP compared to 15W counterparts allows for better sustained multi-core performance in multimedia laptops.

What we don't like about Intel Core i7 1068g7

  • Lower base and boost clock speeds compared to older 14nm Intel processors, which can offset IPC gains.
  • Struggles with modern AAA games; integrated graphics are best suited for older titles or e-sports.
  • Limited to 4 cores and 8 threads, which is less competitive against newer high-core-count processors.
  • Locked multiplier prevents overclocking for performance enthusiasts.
  • Performance is heavily dependent on the laptop's cooling solution and power limits.

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-1068G7 is a flagship 10th Gen Ice Lake-U mobile processor built on a 10nm process, featuring 4 cores and 8 threads with a base clock of 2.3 GHz and a max turbo frequency of 4.1 GHz. Key characteristics include an 8MB L3 cache, a 28W TDP, and integrated Iris Plus Graphics G7 with 64 execution units, offering a significant jump in IPC and AI acceleration via DL Boost and AVX-512 support. Main pros include its superior integrated graphics performance compared to predecessors and its role as the fastest 28W ultra-thin laptop chip of its era, often found in high-end devices like the MacBook Pro 13. However, its main cons include a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking and the fact that its higher power consumption compared to 15W variants requires more robust active cooling solutions.

Compare Intel Core i7 1068g7 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i7 1068g7 and other processors

No results found