Intel Core i3-4370 vs Intel Core i7-3612QM Comparison

The Intel Core i3-4370 and Intel Core i7-3612QM sit at nearly identical average benchmark scores—1130 versus 1129—yet they achieve this parity through fundamentally different designs. The i3-4370 is a desktop Haswell chip with two fast cores, while the i7-3612QM is a mobile Ivy Bridge part with four slower cores and Hyper-Threading. The data shows the i7-3612QM wins every head-to-head Cinebench test, but the i3-4370 matches it on aggregate because its higher clocks close the gap in single-threaded workloads. This is a classic trade-off between core count and clock speed, with the mobile part’s extra cores providing a consistent, if modest, lead across all measured scenarios.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear recommendation: the Intel Core i7-3612QM is the stronger processor in every Cinebench test recorded, winning all five head-to-head comparisons. Its margins are consistent at roughly 16.7% across both single-core and multi-core tests, which is a substantial advantage for anyone running threaded applications. The i3-4370, meanwhile, is not without merit—it matches the i7’s average score in the aggregate database—but that parity comes from its 3.80 GHz base clock versus the i7’s 2.10 GHz base, not from superior performance in any specific benchmark.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput, the i7-3612QM is the obvious choice. Its 4 cores and 8 threads deliver 397 points in Cinebench R15 multicore versus 330 for the i3, and 3944 versus 3284 in R23 multicore. These are not marginal differences; they represent a real performance tier gap. However, the i3-4370 is a desktop part, meaning it fits a different system context entirely. The verdict depends on platform: if you have a Socket 1150 board, the i3 is your option; if you have a Socket G2 (988B) laptop, the i7 is the only one that fits. The data cannot recommend one over the other without knowing the socket, but within their respective platforms, the i7’s benchmark dominance is unambiguous.

Architecture Differences

The two chips belong to different Intel generations and target different markets. The i3-4370 uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node, with a die size of 177 mm². The i7-3612QM uses Ivy Bridge, also on 22 nm, but with a slightly smaller die at 160 mm². Both chips pack the same transistor count—1,400 million—which is notable given the i7 has double the cores. This suggests the i3’s larger die area is not about more silicon for compute units but rather reflects differences in integrated graphics and memory controllers.

The i7-3612QM features 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-4370 offers only 2 cores and 4 threads. The i7 compensates for a lower base clock of 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, whereas the i3 has no boost capability and runs at a fixed 3.80 GHz. Cache sizes differ too: the i3 has 4 MB of shared L3, while the i7 has 6 MB. The integrated graphics also diverge, with the i3 sporting Intel HD 4600 and the i7 using Intel HD 4000. The i7 is built for mobile use with a 35 W TDP, while the i3 is a desktop chip rated at 54 W. The i3 supports PCIe Gen 3, but the i7’s PCIe information is not listed in the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i7-3612QM wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, and the margins are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7 scores 397 against the i3’s 330, a delta of -16.9% from the i3’s perspective. This means the i7 is roughly 20% faster in that test. Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the i7 posts 1656 versus 1379, again a -16.7% delta. The same pattern holds for R23 multicore: 3944 versus 3284, with a -16.7% delta.

Single-core results are more surprising. Given the i3’s 3.80 GHz clock, one might expect it to outpace the i7’s 2.10 GHz base. Yet the i7 wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 233 points against 194 for the i3, a -16.7% delta. In R23 single-core, the i7 scores 556 versus 463, again -16.7%. This is counterintuitive—a lower-clocked chip beating a higher-clocked one in single-thread tests. The data does not explain why, but it suggests the i7’s boost clock of 3.10 GHz, combined with Ivy Bridge’s IPC, is enough to overcome the i3’s raw frequency advantage. The i7 also has additional benchmark data not available for the i3: Geekbench multicore at 1691 and single-core at 501, which further confirms its all-around strength.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every major specification. Core count is the most obvious: 2 cores and 4 threads for the i3-4370 versus 4 cores and 8 threads for the i7-3612QM. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and the i7 adds a 3.10 GHz boost clock that the i3 lacks entirely. TDP is another split—54 W for the desktop i3 versus 35 W for the mobile i7—which reflects the i7’s efficiency focus despite having more cores. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1150 for the i3 and Intel Socket G2 (988B) for the i7.

Cache configurations differ, with the i3 offering 4 MB shared L3 and the i7 offering 6 MB. The i3 uses Haswell architecture, the i7 uses Ivy Bridge. Their integrated graphics differ as well: HD 4600 on the i3 versus HD 4000 on the i7. The i3 supports PCIe Gen 3, while the i7’s PCIe specification is not listed. The i7 has a part number (SR0MQ) and a release date of April 2012, while the i3 was released in July 2014. Both lack ECC memory support and have locked multipliers. The i7’s memory support field is null in the data, though both use dual-channel memory buses.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The i7-3612QM wins every multi-core test. In Cinebench R20 multicore, it scores 1656 versus 1379 for the i3-4370, a -16.7% delta. The R23 multicore result is 3944 versus 3284, also -16.7%.

Q: Does the i3-4370 ever win a benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i7-3612QM winning all five Cinebench tests, with the i3-4370 recording zero wins. The i3’s average benchmark score of 1130 is nearly identical to the i7’s 1129, but that aggregate parity does not translate to any individual test victory.

Q: Why does the i7 win single-core tests despite a lower base clock?

A: The i7-3612QM has a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, while the i3-4370 runs at a fixed 3.80 GHz with no boost. Despite the frequency gap, the i7 scores 556 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 463 for the i3, a -16.7% delta. The data does not specify the cause, but the result is consistent across all single-core tests.

Q: Are these processors comparable for the same system?

A: No. The i3-4370 uses Intel Socket 1150 and is a desktop chip, while the i7-3612QM uses Intel Socket G2 (988B) and is mobile. Their sockets are incompatible, so they cannot be swapped into the same system.

Q: How do their cache sizes differ?

A: The i3-4370 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i7-3612QM has 6 MB. Both have 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core.

Q: Which chip is more power-efficient?

A: The i7-3612QM has a TDP of 35 W despite having 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-4370 has a TDP of 54 W with only 2 cores and 4 threads. The i7 uses less power while delivering higher performance in every benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-3612QM wins in every measurable benchmark category, but the i3-4370 still has a place. The i7’s strengths are clear: it dominates multi-threaded applications like Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore, with scores of 397, 1656, and 3944 respectively. It also wins single-core tests, which is unexpected given its lower clock, making it the better choice for any workload that can use more than two cores. The i7’s 6 MB of L3 cache and 8 threads give it a structural advantage in rendering, encoding, and other parallel tasks.

The i3-4370’s only advantage lies in its aggregate average score of 1130, which matches the i7’s 1129. This parity suggests that in a mixed workload—some single-threaded, some multi-threaded—the i3 can hold its own, likely due to its 3.80 GHz base clock. However, the head-to-head data shows the i7 winning even single-core tests, so the i3’s aggregate parity may come from benchmark weighting or the i3’s desktop-oriented memory and PCIe support (Gen 3). The i3 also has a different integrated GPU (HD 4600 versus HD 4000), which could matter for systems without a discrete graphics card. Ultimately, the i7-3612QM is the superior processor in raw performance, while the i3-4370 is the only option for Socket 1150 owners who need a low-core-count, high-clock CPU.