Where would you draw the line for the "real i7"?

There has been a lot of criticism from reviewers as well as people in general that the Core i7-7Y75 featured in the Eve V is not a “real” Core i7, compared to the U-series Core i7 CPU like i7-7500U, 7600U, or 7660U that are often used in competitor tablets.

However, when you see the overall picture, both Core i7s are demolished by the desktop variant like the i7-7700K or 7700 anyway. The i7-7700K is almost 3 times faster than both the i7-7500U and 7Y75, despite bearing the same i7 branding.

Even in mobile category products, the i7-7700HQ still beats the i7-7500U by over 70%. That sorta kinda stretches the definition of i7. Meanwhile, the i7-7500U only manages to beat the i7-7Y75 by 33%, so clearly there is a much larger gap between the i7-HQ and i7-U, than it is between the i7-U and i7-Y. (not to mention that the i7-7Y75 implementation on the Eve V is much better than average, thanks to its 7W TDP configuration)

The situation is even more ridiculous when you see the bigger picture. Both the dual-core i7s (7500U and 7Y75) are not even as fast as the cheapest Core i3 thats used in desktop platform (i3-7100). When a program states “Core i7” in its system requirements, it could very well be ambiguous.

So my question is, which “i7” would you call a “real i7”?

(all performance comparison pulled from cpubenchmark.net)


Simply put, any i7 that is not at least quad core is not a “real i7” to me.

So no, even for U-series I do not think them as “real i7”.


Just to provide some context for this discussion.

People are not complaining because Y-series CPUs are bad. People are complaining because a device in the same class of portability has a U-class processor (Surface Pro 2017) while not sacrificing any other specifications. Weight, battery size, etc. The V is heavier and only has a marginally bigger battery than SP2017, while having a Y-series chip. The SP i5 is fanless as well, leading to more reason to compare.


fair point… Development Hell and Feature Creep can make a great product look bad :confused:

1 Like

For me the V spec was decided based on the following…

  1. its potential users (read: use), and then
  2. what form factor, and then
  3. what is best in class (at that time),
  4. and then what would make it different that existing competitors…
  5. and then we did not stop there, we challenged the quality and its performance in our community and made changes as and when we needed,

all these was done keeping in mind that that this product is NOT for…

  1. Strictly HEAVY GAMER. (still manged to show few games performing to its potentials).
  2. Heavy Powerhouse user who needs super GPU (as Games/Grapjhic Apps demand). (still manged to pack with essential ports to support externally and demoed).
  3. Nor for Geek Professionals who requires spec that would needs more RAM (>16GB), CPU (>Y series), for their heavy applications. (Y series does not support these configuration).
  4. Not for NASA :slight_smile: or Large Hadron (Proton) Collider :slight_smile: (Yet, try it out it will still perform the same task as they have in their lab).

Rest for all ‘V’ is all set to charm and surprise…
Basic Users (mama, papa, etc.),
Students (with all social, science, maths, etc. apps),
Professionals (with their office, project, desing and architect work),
Artisits (painters, singers, dancers, etc.),
Gamers (for games which does not mandates U or HQ series CPU’s),

and all remaining movers and shakers of modern day.

So if anyone wants to argue on Y - U - HQ of i7, then they need to first ask themselves what is their need, and choose wisely, also remember that most of the buyers are not interested in heavy machines, as their are plenty of them which will burn your lap and hands (and also can work as dryer for your lanudry), plus it can also subsitute as your bicep builder, and plus it can test your pateints for charging it every 3-4 houors of use, plus it can become abosulte on the very next day as you will find the same company coming with better improvements (slighter) models, and then you wished i shoud have waited for longer (1/2 year), and then cough out 30-40% more money, etc. etc. etc.

Decide wisely.


The difference between a U and a Y is very small (~30% as said above), and most of that loss is in TDP. In actual usage, the performance difference may be noticeable - but only noticeable. There’s nothing different enough about the processors to make any kind of usage difference in real life (except for Intel HD vs Iris graphics, which does make a real life difference). For gaming, the Y and the U + external GPU will perform about the same (and have the same amount of bottlenecking). For programming, computational tasts, spreadsheets, rendering, etc. there really won’t be much difference.

If you’re somebody that needs more than a Y, you need more than a U. HQs make good for mobile workstations, but for somethings you just have to have a desktop.

The Y and a U are the same processor, just different clock speeds and TDPs. It really bothers me when people think the Y seriously hinders the device, because it doesn’t - a poor review does.


Is about perception isn’t it?

The reality is, a gen 3 or 4 iCore is still good enough for all but the most bleeding edge user, so a slight drop in performance for what we could conceivably get is no biggie. And if you are wanting bleeding edge, you wont be going for a U either.

But the stat sheet still say is slower, with not much increase in battery life and it no longer have fanless as an advantage. Is it 30% better in battery life for the 30% slower speed? No.

I think from a marketing stand point, there is a reason why the m series was rebranded to the Y series, it is slower. But I dont think it managed to shake the perception fully. Hence why everyone goes for U even when not necessary,

1 Like

In the desktop market an old i7 is still good. I’ve got an overclocked 4770k and no plans to upgrade to a 8700k for a 15-20% boost unless the processor craps itself.

Not to mention having to upgrade the motherboard and RAM.

On the topic from a marketing point i3 is “good”, i5 is “better” and i7 is “best”.

I don’t blame an unenthusiastic consumer who’s presented with two i7s (Y and U) and has to pick one based on some arbitrary reason like that Y comes after U in the alphabet so it’s obviously faster.

Coffee lake i7 definitely

Any i7 that isn’t a desktop part i consider not real, except the hq which comes quite close to the desktop parts.

Another question would be which series counts. I don’t imagine you can buy a i7-3 any more, but if you had one, would it still be a real i7?

Here we must though remember that Surface rarely gets over 6 hours of use, as per @Patrick_Hermawan’s earlier reddit poll as well as testimonies from various users with SP4, such as @Alexandr_Smirnov so one could argue that battery is sacrificed for performance

Imo I don’t count any laptop variants i7 as true i7s. Also @Scuff on the desktop side there hasn’t really been that huge of a change of improvement in recent years. I read an article recently comparing 4th gen i7 desktop to current gen and the result in gaming was only a few % more frames. I have a 4790k not really worth it to upgrade to anything new right now. I hope by late end of next year that changes.

If you’re looking for powerful laptops with battery life. I think Intel moving to 10 nm+ chips and the recent core increases that have been going on the desktop market will lead to laptops with increased core counts and improved thermals / battery life from moving to 10 nm+. Also hope to see improvements with the new Nvidia Volta moving to 12nm.

I think that late 2018 - CES 2019 we will start to some really powerful thin and light laptops come to market. Ice lake + Volta should be an interesting combo. I’m excited to see what kind of improvement we might see in the desktop, laptop, and tablet markets from the move to smaller architecture.