Intel Core i3-1005G1 vs Intel Core i7-3610QM Comparison

The Intel Core i3-1005G1 and Intel Core i7-3610QM represent two very different eras of mobile computing. The i3-1005G1 is a modern, low-power Ice Lake part, while the i7-3610QM is a higher-power Ivy Bridge chip from a previous generation. Benchmark results reveal a fascinating split: the older i7-3610QM generally dominates in Cinebench tests, but the newer i3-1005G1 achieves a dramatic victory in Geekbench single-core performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-1005G1 has a higher average benchmark score of 1265, compared to the Intel Core i7-3610QM's 1244. This places the i3-1005G1 at the 35th percentile and the i7-3610QM at the 34th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: How does the newer i3-1005G1 compare to the older i7-3610QM in single-core performance?

A: The results are starkly split. In Geekbench single-core, the i3-1005G1 wins with a score of 1083 versus 537, a massive 101.7% advantage. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the i7-3610QM wins with 617 versus 574, a 7% lead.

Q: In which benchmark does the i7-3610QM have its largest winning margin?

A: The i7-3610QM's largest win is in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where it scores 62 against the i3-1005G1's 57, an 8.1% difference. Across the Cinebench suite, its margins are consistent, ranging from 6.8% to 8.1%.

Q: What is the i3-1005G1's most significant victory over the i7-3610QM?

A: The i3-1005G1's most significant victory is in the Geekbench single-core test, where its score of 1083 is more than double the i7-3610QM's 537, representing a 101.7% delta. It also wins the Geekbench multi-core test with a score of 1978 versus 1831, an 8% advantage.

Q: What are the distinct memory and process node differences between these two CPUs?

A: The i3-1005G1 uses DDR4 memory with a 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and is built on a 10 nm process. The i7-3610QM uses DDR3 memory with a 25.6 GB/s bandwidth and is built on a 22 nm process, containing 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die.

Q: What is the production status and launch MSRP for the i7-3610QM?

A: The Intel Core i7-3610QM is marked as end-of-life and had a launch MSRP of $378. The i3-1005G1 has no launch MSRP listed in the data and is currently marked as active in production.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Core i3-1005G1 uses the Ice Lake architecture (specifically Ice Lake-U) on a 10 nm process node, while the Intel Core i7-3610QM uses the older Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm node. This generational gap is visible in the transistor count and die size: the i7-3610QM has 1,400 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, whereas the i3-1005G1's die size is 123 mm².

The core configurations differ significantly. The i3-1005G1 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-3610QM doubles that with 4 cores and 8 threads. Cache hierarchies also differ; both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the i3-1005G1 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-3610QM offers 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support is another major divider. The i3-1005G1 supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus providing 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. In contrast, the i7-3610QM supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus that provides only 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a direct consequence of the newer memory controller integrated into the Ice Lake design.

The integrated graphics differ as well, with the i3-1005G1 featuring UHD Graphics and the i7-3610QM featuring Intel HD 4000. Both support PCIe Gen 3, but the i7-3610QM specification notes 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-1005G1 simply lists Gen 3. The i3-1005G1 uses the Intel BGA 1526 socket, whereas the i7-3610QM uses the Intel Socket G2 (988B), reflecting their different target platforms.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite paints a consistent picture: the Intel Core i7-3610QM wins all six Cinebench tests, but by relatively narrow margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-3610QM scores 440 against the i3-1005G1's 410, a 6.8% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a similar story, with the i7-3610QM winning 62 to 57, an 8.1% advantage.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the i7-3610QM continues its winning streak. It scores 1836 in multi-core versus 1709, and 259 in single-core versus 241, both representing a 6.9% delta. The Cinebench R23 results are nearly identical in percentage terms: the i7-3610QM wins multi-core with 4373 against 4070 (a 6.9% gap) and single-core with 617 against 574 (a 7% gap). The data shows a remarkably consistent performance advantage for the older chip in this specific rendering workload.

The Geekbench tests, however, tell a completely different story. The i3-1005G1 wins Geekbench multi-core with a score of 1978 against the i7-3610QM's 1831, an 8% advantage. The real outlier is Geekbench single-core, where the i3-1005G1 scores 1083, which is more than double the i7-3610QM's 537. This 101.7% delta is by far the largest margin in any benchmark between the two CPUs.

This split is intriguing. The i7-3610QM's consistent wins in Cinebench suggest that its extra cores and threads (4 cores/8 threads versus 2 cores/4 threads) are beneficial in that workload, even with older architecture. Yet, the i3-1005G1's massive Geekbench single-core win indicates a substantial architectural advantage in single-threaded tasks, likely stemming from the newer Ice Lake design.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The most obvious difference is in core count: the i7-3610QM has 4 cores and 8 threads, whereas the i3-1005G1 has only 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks also differ, with the i3-1005G1 running at 1200 MHz and the i7-3610QM at 2300 MHz, though their boost clocks are closer at 3.40 GHz and 3.30 GHz respectively.

Thermal design power (TDP) is a substantial differentiator. The i3-1005G1 is rated at 15W, while the i7-3610QM is rated at 45W. This makes the i3-1005G1 a much lower-power part, which is consistent with its smaller die size of 123 mm² versus the i7-3610QM's 160 mm².

The process node is a fundamental architectural difference: 10 nm for the i3-1005G1 versus 22 nm for the i7-3610QM. Cache sizes differ, with the i3-1005G1 having 4 MB of L3 cache and the i7-3610QM having 6 MB. Memory support is split between DDR4 (i3-1005G1) and DDR3 (i7-3610QM), with corresponding bandwidths of 51.2 GB/s and 25.6 GB/s.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1526 for the i3-1005G1 and Intel Socket G2 (988B) for the i7-3610QM. Their integrated graphics are also different (UHD Graphics versus Intel HD 4000). The production status differs, with the i3-1005G1 active and the i7-3610QM end-of-life. The part numbers are SRG0SSRGKF for the i3-1005G1 and SR0MN for the i7-3610QM. The launch dates are 2019-07-31 for the i3-1005G1 and 2012-04-22 for the i7-3610QM.

The Verdict

The benchmark data suggests a nuanced verdict. The Intel Core i7-3610QM wins the majority of head-to-head benchmarks (6 wins out of 8), particularly in all Cinebench tests, where it holds a consistent 6.8% to 8.1% lead. This makes it the better choice for workloads that resemble Cinebench's rendering tasks, which apparently benefit from its 4-core/8-thread configuration.

However, the Intel Core i3-1005G1 wins the two Geekbench tests, and its single-core victory is nothing short of dominant. The 101.7% advantage in Geekbench single-core suggests that for single-threaded applications, the newer Ice Lake architecture is vastly more efficient. Its 8% win in Geekbench multi-core also indicates that its 2-core design can outperform the older 4-core design in some workloads.

The data implies that the i3-1005G1 is the better choice for users whose primary tasks are single-threaded or rely on modern instruction sets, where its newer architecture shines. The i7-3610QM, despite being older and end-of-life, remains competitive and is the better option for multi-threaded rendering workloads. The i3-1005G1's lower TDP of 15W versus 45W also makes it more suitable for power-constrained devices, though the data does not include battery life tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-3610QM is the clear winner in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both in multi-core and single-core variants. Its margins are tight but consistent, ranging from 6.8% to 8.1%. This suggests that the i7-3610QM is the stronger performer in rendering and other CPU-intensive tasks that are well-represented by Cinebench's workload. Its higher base clock (2300 MHz vs 1200 MHz) likely contributes to these wins in shorter bursts, and its 6 MB of L3 cache may help in these scenarios.

The Intel Core i3-1005G1 wins in Geekbench multi-core (1978 vs 1831) and single-core (1083 vs 537). The multi-core win is modest at 8%, but the single-core win is extraordinary. This points to the i3-1005G1 being the superior choice for single-threaded applications like web browsing, office productivity, and legacy software that does not scale well across cores. The higher memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s vs 25.6 GB/s) may also play a role in the Geekbench multi-core victory, as memory-intensive tasks would benefit from the faster DDR4 interface.

The production status also influences the decision: the i7-3610QM is end-of-life, while the i3-1005G1 is active. This means the i3-1005G1 is the more future-proof option from a supply and support standpoint, even though the i7-3610QM has a launch MSRP of $378. The data suggests that users prioritizing raw multi-threaded rendering performance should look to the i7-3610QM, while those needing superior single-thread speed and modern platform features should choose the i3-1005G1.