AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 vs Intel Core i7-3615QE Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3615QE and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 are separated by five years of silicon evolution, yet their benchmark scores are virtually inseparable. The data shows a 0.2% average benchmark score difference between the two, with the Intel part edging ahead across every Cinebench test. This is a curious outcome: a 2012 mobile processor with eight threads against a 2017 desktop chip with four. The comparison reveals that raw architectural age matters less than the specific configuration of cores, cache, and clock speeds.

FAQ

Q: How close are these two processors in overall performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QE has an average benchmark score of 1381, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 scores 1379. This represents a 0.1% delta in the Intel part’s favor, placing both at the 36th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QE wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 481 in Cinebench R15 multi-core (0.2% ahead of 480), 2005 in R20 multi-core (0.1% ahead of 2002), and 4774 in R23 multi-core (0.1% ahead of 4767).

Q: Is there any single-core performance advantage?

A: The single-core results are effectively tied. In Cinebench R15 single-core, both score 67. The Intel part leads by 0.4% in R20 single-core (283 vs 282) and by 0.1% in R23 single-core (674 vs 673).

Q: What do the specifications say about their target markets?

A: The Intel Core i7-3615QE is a mobile processor using an Intel BGA 1023 socket with a 45W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is an active desktop processor using AMD Socket AM4 with a 65W TDP.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core i7-3615QE does not support ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 does support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, compared to the Intel Core i7-3615QE’s boost clock of 3.30 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two chips is substantial. The Intel Core i7-3615QE is built on a 22nm process by Intel, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 uses a 14nm process from GlobalFoundries. That process advantage is reflected in transistor density: the AMD part packs 4,800 million transistors into a 213 mm² die, versus 1,400 million transistors in a 160 mm² die for the Intel chip.

Core counts are identical at four, but the threading strategies diverge. The Intel part supports eight threads, doubling its core count, while the AMD processor runs four threads from four cores. This explains why the Intel chip wins every multi-core benchmark despite lower base and boost clocks: 2.30 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost versus 3.10 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost for AMD.

Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. This gives AMD a 2 MB L3 advantage and larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations.

The Intel part integrates Intel HD 4000 graphics, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has no integrated graphics. The AMD chip supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a measured memory bandwidth of 4256 MB/s, while the Intel part’s memory support is not listed in the data. The AMD processor also features PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Intel chip’s PCIe configuration is unspecified.

Production status separates them further: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is listed as “Active,” while the Intel Core i7-3615QE has no production status listed. The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel part does not.

The Verdict

The data paints a picture of near-total performance parity. The Intel Core i7-3615QE wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, but the margins are razor-thin: 0.2%, 0%, 0.1%, 0.4%, 0.1%, and 0.1% across the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 suites. No benchmark shows a meaningful advantage for either processor.

The choice comes down to platform and feature priorities. The Intel part is a mobile chip with integrated graphics, a 45W TDP, and eight threads — suitable for a compact system that needs graphics output and lower power draw. The AMD processor is a desktop chip with a 65W TDP, four threads, ECC memory support, and an unlocked multiplier — aimed at users who need reliability features and overclocking headroom.

For raw compute performance, the benchmarks show no winner. For platform flexibility, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 offers ECC memory and PCIe Gen 3, while the Intel Core i7-3615QE offers integrated graphics and lower power consumption. The Ryzen chip is still in active production, which may matter for availability. The Intel part’s eight threads give it a slight edge in multi-threaded tests, but the 0.1-0.4% deltas are within noise territory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Intel Core i7-3615QE comes from Intel with an Ivy Bridge architecture and no series designation, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is part of the 1000 series with a Zen architecture. The Intel chip uses a 22nm process; the AMD chip uses 14nm.

Thread counts differ: 8 for Intel, 4 for AMD. Base clocks are 2.30 GHz for Intel and 3.10 GHz for AMD, with boost clocks of 3.30 GHz and 3.40 GHz respectively. TDPs are 45W for Intel and 65W for AMD. Sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1023 versus AMD Socket AM4.

Cache layouts diverge completely. Intel uses 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core with 6 MB shared L3. AMD uses 96 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core with 8 MB shared L3. The Intel part has Intel HD 4000 integrated graphics; the AMD part has none. ECC memory support belongs only to AMD. The AMD chip supports DDR4 memory, while the Intel chip’s memory support is not listed. Memory bandwidth is listed only for AMD at 4256 MB/s. PCIe support is listed only for AMD as Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel chip does not. Release dates differ by five years: the Intel part launched on 2012-04-28, the AMD part on 2017-06-28. The AMD processor is in active production, the Intel processor has no production status. Part numbers are SR0NC for Intel and YD120BBBM4KAE for AMD. The AMD chip’s market segment is desktop; the Intel chip’s is mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The six Cinebench tests tell a story of statistical equivalence. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel Core i7-3615QE scores 481 against the AMD’s 480, a 0.2% margin. The single-core R15 test is a dead tie at 67 for both processors.

Cinebench R20 shows the same pattern. Multi-core results are 2005 for Intel and 2002 for AMD, a 0.1% difference. Single-core results are 283 for Intel and 282 for AMD, a 0.4% margin — the largest delta in any test.

Cinebench R23 continues the trend. Multi-core scores are 4774 for Intel and 4767 for AMD, a 0.1% gap. Single-core scores are 674 for Intel and 673 for AMD, another 0.1% gap.

The Intel part wins all six tests, but the maximum winning margin is 0.4%. The benchmark data suggests that the two processors deliver functionally identical Cinebench performance, despite their architectural differences. The Intel chip’s eight threads versus four for AMD does not translate into a meaningful multi-core advantage in this comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3615QE wins every benchmark test, but the margins are so small that they suggest no practical performance advantage. Its wins are consistent across all Cinebench versions, from R15 to R23, and in both single-core and multi-core tests. The largest Intel win is 0.4% in Cinebench R20 single-core.

The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 wins no benchmarks, but it has specification advantages that matter outside of raw compute. It supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. It has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. It uses DDR4 memory with a listed bandwidth of 4256 MB/s. It has a larger L3 cache at 8 MB versus 6 MB, and larger L1 and L2 caches per core.

The Intel part’s wins are functional: integrated graphics for systems without a discrete GPU, a 45W TDP for lower power draw, and eight threads for multitasking. The AMD part’s wins are platform-level: active production status, ECC support, overclocking capability, and modern DDR4 memory support.

For users who need a processor with integrated graphics and lower power consumption, the Intel Core i7-3615QE is the clear choice. For users who need ECC memory, overclocking, and a modern desktop platform, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is the only option. For pure Cinebench performance, the data shows no meaningful winner.