But how does it compare against the popular i7 7700 HQ from the previous generation we'll find out in this video, with a series of gaming and application benchmarks to see how they perform and discuss the performance, temperatures and battery life differences between them to help you decide Which you should buy in your next laptop earlier this year, Intel launched their new eighth generation coffee like laptop CPUs, which, for the first time from Intel, gives us up to six cores in a laptop with the 87 58 and above before this, the four core seventh Gen 7700 h qs seem to be commonplace in most of the laptops that i tested, and a lot of you have asked me to compare the two chips aside from those differences in core count. The newer 8750 H can also reach higher clock speeds when boosting how much of a performance difference does this make practically to test this I've run a lot of benchmarks on two different laptops with these processors to find out, the 7700 HQ laptop is the msi ge62. A 7 RF, while the 8750 h laptop, is the newer msi, ge62 b, 8 RF. Both laptops are basically the same with the only difference in specs being the cpu. They both have nvidia 1070 graphics and the same 16 gig. If ddr4 2400 memory running a dual channel, i've also got the same battery and cooling system, so we'll look at the differences in battery drain and temperatures too we'll start off with the game benchmarks first, followed by various applications and cpu specific tests.

Afterwards, Fortnight was tested on both laptops, using the exact same replay and we're, seeing a 10 improvement to the average frame rate at epic settings and as small as 6 percent improvement. The 1 learn so the differences here, aren't too large and birthda, providing a great experience where 4, which was tested by performing the same test, run in the practice range and at epoch settings as a much larger 21 improvement to the average frame rates. With the 8750 H and a much larger 51 percent improvement to the Wampus Loes, which are only just below the average frame rate of the 7700 HQ with epic settings, csgo was tested using the u litical benchmark and with all settings maxed out. The 87 58 was performing 21 better on average than the 7700 HQ, and this increases slightly to a 22 improvement of minimum settings with smaller differences in the Whomper solos Rainbow six siege was tested using the built in benchmark, and there was almost no difference at all Here, however, the older 7700 HQ was actually slightly ahead in all tests, not really sure why that was the case, but the differences in CPU are pretty negligible. In this title, dota 2 was tested using an intensive replay. This test does not represent actual gameplay, which would see larger frame rates in this specific repeatable test, though, 8750 H is averaging 28 percent better than the 7700 HQ with all settings. Maxed out, Assassin's Creed origins was tested using the built in benchmark and the 8750 H is coming out 11 ahead for a verage frame rates at ultra high settings with the 10 improvement to the 1 low result.

Far cry 5 was also tested with the built in benchmark, and there was a similar improvement same here too. At Ultra settings, 8750 gauge was scoring 15 better in average frame rate, with the larger 22 percent improvement murdered for the 1 lower shadow of the Tomb. Raider was once again tested using the built in benchmark. Although a smaller differences in performance were recorded, there was just a 6 percent boost to average frame rates with the highest settings with 8th gen chip and a slightly larger 10 improvement at the lower settings. As well s GPU bound watchdogs, 2 tends to be a pretty CPU intensive title, often maxing out all cores at Ultra settings. The 8750 H is reaching 20 higher average frame rates than the 7700 HQ with just a 12 boost to the 1 low result. No real difference is seen at the lower less GPU bound settings, either with the lower 18 percent improvement to average frame rates at low settings. Ghost Recon is another fairly intensive title, though I found this one to be more GPU bound at basically any selling level. With that in mind, at Ultra settings, that 8750 was performing just 8 better in average frame rates with about the same result at low settings. The Witcher 3 was averaging just under 10, better frame rates at Ultra settings with the 87 58, with a much larger 19 improvement to the 1 low result. The 87 58 pulls out further ahead as we lower the settings.

However, I think the larger increased a 1 lows from the 8th gen chip is more useful. Once we're already averaging above 100 FPS shadow of war was tested using the built in benchmark, and there was a 10 improvement with the 87 58 in ultra settings and a slightly higher 11 improvement with the lowest settings in use. On average in the games tested max settings, the 8750 age was around 13 better in terms of average frame rate when compared with the 7700 HQ. But as you can see, it really depends on the game. These results are, in theory, a worst case scenario as I'm. Comparing the games at max settings in many games max settings will usually be more GPU than CPU bound with lower settings, showing us a larger difference of performance, though again this depends on the specific game now let's move away from gaming and into the application testing in These more CPU intensive tests, both CPUs, were under bolted by minus 0.15 air volts in order to best attempt removal of thermal and polymer throttling. With that in mind, however, that was still some power limit throttling on the 87 58 CPU. However, I think it's safe to assume that this will always be the case. I'Ve tested a heap of 8th gen laptops now and more than 90 of them would still power them a throttle under stress test, even while under bolted. So I think this still represents a fairly real world scenario with these CPUs honestly, it would be unrealistic if I actually tested one that didn't trottle at all under full load.

This does mean that performance will vary between 8750 H laptops based on power limits and thermal solutions, but I think we're showing a pretty good example of 8750 H performance here with under bolting applied Cinebench scales, pretty well over multiple CPU cores. So in the multi core test, we're seeing quite a large 68 percent improvement with the 87 50 H over the 7700 H cube due to a combination of those 50 more cores and a clock speed the highest single core clock. Speed is shown in the blue bar with the 8750 age 16 ahead. In this one, Adobe Premiere was used to export one of my laptop review, videos at 1080p, and the 8750 H is getting the job done almost 30 faster when compared to the 7700 HQ, not a bad result, as premier doesn't generally scale too well with more cores Or at least that's the case with my 16 core thread, Ripper system and break was used to encode a 4k video file to 1080p and then a separate 1080p video file to 720p, using their HQ presets. This test scales better compared to Adobe Premiere with the 8750 H performing 55 percent better in the 4k test and 68 faster in the 1080p test. The 7th of benchmark was used to demonstrate the decompression and compression speeds of both CPUs. The decompression result sees the largest difference with the 8750 H running 55, faster than the 7700 HQ and then 36 faster in the compression test.

I'Ve used veracrypt to test the aes encryption and decryption speeds and we're, seeing another large win for the 8750 h, which is performing 69 better in encryption and 65 percent better in decryption when compared with the 7700 HQ, the corona benchmark renders the same using the CPU. A task that scales well over multiple cores in this test. The 8750 h, is completing the task 54 percent faster than the 7700 h gear. The v8 benchmark behaves in a similar manner with the 87 58 completing this task, 55 percent faster than the 7700 HQ in Geekbench 4. There was a 43 improvement to multi core speeds, with 8750 h and just a 10 improvement to the single core speed pass. Mark 9 saw similar increases with 87 58 performing 42 better in multi core but 22, better for single core on average we're, seeing the 87 58 performing close to 50 ahead of the 7700 HQ in all of the multi core tests, combined, which makes sense when you Consider that it's also got 50 more cores. Of course not applications will scale perfectly as we can see, but I still found it interesting that this was how things have reached out. I only did three different single core tests here and in these that 8750 H was averaging 16 percent better than 7700 HQ now. Let'S take a look at the battery life of both laptops in the yellow bar. I tested both laptops by running the aida64 stress test.

So smashing all CPU cores with load as expected, the 7700 HQ is lasting longer in this test, 27 percent longer than 80 750 H laptop as it does have half the core count. It'S also lasting a few minutes longer when gaming shown by the green bar, the blue bar just shows watching YouTube, which was interesting in this test. The 87 58 was actually better. Both were using the Intel, integrated graphics for this test, and apparently both chips have the same Intel, HD, 630, graphics, so I'm, not too sure why the 8750 H lasted longer. Here both laptops were owned with keyboard and LED lighting off screen on 50 brightness and background ups disabled. As for the temperatures, both laptops were tested with the same ambient room, temperature of 18 degrees Celsius, and, as we can see, they also have identical heat pipe design. So the cooling system appears to be the same on both as the heat pipes are shared, I've included, the GPU temperatures just for fun, as a change in one component may affect the other. We can see that in most cases the 7700 HQ laptop is running cooler than the 80 750 H under identical tests, while under stress test with a fans maxed out and with a minus 0.15 air, volt CPU wonder multiplied by the black bar. The 8750 H was much hotter than the 7700 HQ owing to those extra two cores and higher clock speeds just quickly. These are the clock speeds of the components during these tests.

We can see that when gaming in under stress test, the 7700 HQ is always able to reach its three point. Four gigahertz or core turbo boost speed. The Eddy 758, on the other hand, is unable to reach its 3.9 gigahertz or quarter MOA speed at stock, but then it's only just behind once under falter and with the fans maxed out, which, as mentioned earlier, is pretty typical performance in most 8750 H based laptops, I'Ve tested so, which CPU should you get in a laptop if possible, I'd recommend the 8750 H, as we can see here, it's performing a fair bit better in all tasks, thanks to the clock, speed bump an additional two cores with that said, though the 7700 HQ Is still a very capable laptop chip, especially in gaming, where more emphasis is typically placed on the GPU anyway, in tasks such as rendering, though, where the extra CPU cores can be utilized well, the 8750 H would be a much better choice. It really depends on what you're doing and, of course, your budget, many older, seventh gen laptops may also be on sale and pressed competitively compared to the 8th, gen counterparts. So still with a look at if you've already got a laptop with a 7700 HQ, I don't think it's really worth upgrading to a new laptop just to get the 80 750 H. Maybe, if you're doing core heavy work – and you really need it otherwise, you'll have to replace the entire laptop, as both CPUs are soldered to the motherboard, which is an expensive upgrade process.

So what did you guys think about the differences in performance between intel's, seventh gen? I7 7700 HQ and 8th gen. I 78758 CPUs. I think it's great, that intel a finally offering more than four cores and laptops for those that need them and the clock. Speed boosts, give us a pretty nice single core improvement as well, be sure to. Let me know your thoughts down in the comments and leave a like if you found the comparison useful thanks for watching and don't forget to subscribe for future comparisons and tech.