AMD Athlon 200GE vs Intel Core i7-3615QM Comparison

The AMD Athlon 200GE and Intel Core i7-3615QM are separated by a single point in average benchmark score (1261 vs. 1260), placing both at the 34th percentile of all CPUs. However, this near-identical overall standing masks a dramatic split in workload-specific performance. The Intel part wins five of seven head-to-head tests, but the AMD chip secures the two most lopsided victories, including a staggering 67% single-core Geekbench advantage. The data reveals two fundamentally different processors: Intel’s older quad-core mobile design dominates threaded and multi-core rendering tasks, while AMD’s newer dual-core desktop chip offers a decisive single-core speed edge in specific legacy and latency-sensitive workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i7-3615QM takes a clean sweep across all five Cinebench tests, and the margins are consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 442 against AMD’s 350, a 20.8% deficit for the Athlon. That exact 20.8% delta repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1845 vs. 1461) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (4393 vs. 3479). The consistency is striking: Intel’s advantage in multi-threaded rendering is uniform across generations of the test suite.

The same 20.8% gap appears in single-core Cinebench tests. In R20 single-core, Intel posts 260 versus AMD’s 206; in R23 single-core, Intel scores 620 against 491. This uniformity suggests the delta is structural rather than workload-specific — likely a function of Intel’s 4-core/8-thread configuration versus AMD’s 2-core/4-thread design, combined with Intel’s 3.30 GHz boost clock.

The story flips completely in Geekbench. In Geekbench multi-core, AMD edges Intel by a hair: 1912 vs. 1907, a 0.3% win for the Athlon 200GE. This is a notable result given Intel’s core-count advantage — AMD’s higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs. 2.30 GHz) and newer Zen architecture nearly neutralize Intel’s extra cores in this specific benchmark.

The most dramatic result is Geekbench single-core. AMD crushes Intel with a score of 925 versus 554 — a 67% lead. This is the single largest delta in the entire comparison and completely inverts the Cinebench narrative. Intel’s Ivy Bridge architecture, despite its boost clock, cannot match AMD’s Zen core in this test.

The final tally: Intel wins 5, AMD wins 2. But the scoreboard understates AMD’s case — its two wins include the largest single margin (67%) and the only multi-core test where it doesn’t lose by 20.8%. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical (1261 vs. 1260), meaning neither chip offers a meaningful overall performance advantage. The selection comes down entirely to which benchmark family matters more for a given use case.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i7-3615QM wins on sustained multi-threaded rendering. Every Cinebench test — R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core — goes to Intel by exactly 20.8%. This includes the R23 multi-core test where Intel scores 4393 against AMD’s 3479. For video encoding, 3D rendering, or any workload that scales across cores, Intel’s 4-core/8-thread design delivers a clear, repeatable advantage. The consistency across all five Cinebench variants suggests this is a reliable performance ceiling, not a test-specific anomaly.

AMD Athlon 200GE wins on single-core Geekbench and edges out multi-core Geekbench. The 67% single-core lead (925 vs. 554) is the defining result of this comparison. This matters for older applications, lightly threaded games, and productivity software that relies on one primary thread. Additionally, AMD wins Geekbench multi-core by 0.3% (1912 vs. 1907), a small but real margin that shows the Zen architecture can hold its own even when outnumbered by cores.

The use-case split is clean. If the workload is Cinebench-class rendering — think 3D animation, visual effects, or CPU-based rendering — Intel is the clear pick. If the workload is Geekbench-class general computing, especially single-threaded execution, AMD’s advantage is substantial. The 20.8% Cinebench deficit for AMD is significant, but the 67% Geekbench single-core deficit for Intel is nearly three times larger in magnitude.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: They are effectively tied. AMD Athlon 200GE averages 1261, and Intel Core i7-3615QM averages 1260 — a difference of 1 point, or roughly 0.08%.

Q: How big is Intel’s lead in multi-core rendering?

A: Intel wins every Cinebench multi-core test by exactly 20.8%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 4393 versus AMD’s 3479.

Q: Is the Athlon 200GE better in any benchmark?

A: Yes. It wins Geekbench single-core by a massive 67% margin (925 vs. 554) and Geekbench multi-core by a narrow 0.3% (1912 vs. 1907).

Q: Why does Intel win Cinebench but lose Geekbench?

A: The data shows Intel’s 4-core/8-thread configuration and 3.30 GHz boost clock drive its Cinebench advantage. AMD’s Zen architecture, with a 3.20 GHz base clock, delivers superior single-thread Geekbench performance despite having fewer cores.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: AMD has 2 cores and 4 threads. Intel has 4 cores and 8 threads. Intel doubles AMD’s thread count, which contributes to its multi-core wins.

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core Geekbench score?

A: AMD Athlon 200GE scores 925, which is 67% higher than Intel Core i7-3615QM’s 554. This is the largest performance gap in the entire comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. AMD Athlon 200GE has 2 cores and 4 threads, while Intel Core i7-3615QM has 4 cores and 8 threads — a 2x advantage in both metrics for Intel. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for AMD and 2.30 GHz for Intel, but Intel adds a 3.30 GHz boost clock while AMD has none. Thermal design power differs: AMD is rated at 35W TDP, Intel at 45W TDP.

Socket and platform are entirely different. AMD uses Socket AM4, Intel uses BGA 1224. AMD’s market segment is Desktop; Intel’s is Mobile. Memory support also diverges: AMD supports DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel’s memory type is not specified in the data, though it uses dual-channel configuration like AMD. PCIe support is listed only for AMD: Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Intel’s PCIe data is absent.

The integrated graphics differ: AMD pairs with Radeon Vega 3, Intel with Intel HD 4000. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier. Production status also differs — AMD is listed as Active, while Intel’s status is not provided. Release dates are far apart: AMD launched in September 2018, Intel in April 2012. AMD’s launch MSRP is $55; Intel has no launch MSRP listed. Part numbers are YD200GC6M20FB for AMD and SR0MP for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. AMD uses Zen architecture (codename Zen, specifically Raven Ridge) on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Intel uses Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process at Intel. AMD’s process node is smaller, and its transistor count is significantly higher: 4,950 million versus Intel’s 1,400 million. Die size also differs: AMD’s is 209.8 mm², Intel’s is 160 mm².

Cache hierarchies diverge considerably. AMD allocates 96 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core, with 4 MB shared L3. Intel uses 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, with 6 MB shared L3. Intel has more total L3 cache (6 MB vs. 4 MB), but AMD has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations. Neither supports ECC memory.

The architecture differences explain the benchmark results. AMD’s newer Zen cores, despite the clock advantage, cannot overcome Intel’s 2x core/thread count in Cinebench. However, Zen’s design clearly excels in Geekbench single-core, where AMD’s 67% lead suggests a major IPC improvement over Ivy Bridge. Intel’s 22 nm process and 1,400 million transistors represent an older design philosophy focused on core count, while AMD’s 14 nm process and 4,950 million transistors indicate a denser, more modern implementation.

The Verdict

The data supports a decisive, workload-dependent choice. For multi-threaded rendering and CPU-heavy productivity, the Intel Core i7-3615QM is the clear winner — it beats AMD by 20.8% across all five Cinebench variants, including a 4393 vs. 3479 result in R23 multi-core. Its 4 cores and 8 threads provide the structural advantage needed for parallel workloads.

For single-threaded performance and general Geekbench-class computing, the AMD Athlon 200GE is the better pick. Its 67% single-core Geekbench lead over Intel (925 vs. 554) is the largest margin in the entire dataset, and it also wins Geekbench multi-core by 0.3%. The 2-core/4-thread design is sufficient for this benchmark family, and the higher base clock of 3.20 GHz delivers tangible benefits.

The average scores say these are equal processors: 1261 vs. 1260, both at the 34th percentile. But averages hide the bimodal performance profile. Users who prioritize Cinebench-style rendering should choose Intel without hesitation. Users who prioritize Geekbench-style single-core performance should choose AMD. The 20.8% Intel advantage in rendering is substantial, but the 67% AMD advantage in single-core Geekbench is more than three times larger. If forced to pick based on magnitude of wins, AMD’s single-core dominance is the more decisive result.